List all Microsoft Outlook email folders, including nested and hidden folders as needed. Configure limits and child-folder inclusion to navigate mailbox structure.
List all email folders
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| top | No | Maximum number of folders to return | |
| includeHidden | No | Include hidden folders | |
| includeChildFolders | No | Include nested child folders |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, and the description only states 'List all email folders,' lacking details on filtering (hidden/child), limits, or side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Extremely concise (one short sentence), but at the cost of missing necessary context; no fluff.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given three parameters and no output schema, the description should explain filtering options and output format; it only says 'List all email folders,' which is inadequate.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3; the tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'List all email folders' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (email folders), but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like outlook_create_folder or outlook_get_folder_stats.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives; no mention of context or preconditions for using the parameters.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.