email_create_folder

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: supports Chinese names with automatic modified UTF-7 encoding, does not error on existing folders, and returns already_exists=true. This provides clear expectations for the agent.

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?

Two concise sentences convey all necessary information without redundancy. Critical details (encoding, duplicate handling) are front-loaded and precise.

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?

For a simple create tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers core aspects: creation behavior, encoding, and duplicate handling. It adequately informs without overspecifying.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a description for the 'folder' parameter, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by mentioning Chinese name support and encoding transformation, which clarifies acceptable inputs.

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?

Description clearly states the tool creates an IMAP folder/mailbox, with specific details about Chinese name support and automatic encoding. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like email_list_folders and email_delete by focusing solely on creation.

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?

The description implies usage for creating folders but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like email_list_folders to check existing folders. No when-not-to-use or alternative names are provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.