list_document_folders

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the non-obvious credential requirement (JWT vs API key) and clarifies it is a listing operation (non-destructive). This adds value beyond the schema.

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?

The description is two sentences with no redundant words. It front-loads the core purpose and then adds a critical context note. Every sentence earns its place.

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 listing tool with good schema coverage, the description covers the essential purpose, output (names and IDs), and a key prerequisite (JWT). It lacks explanation of pagination behavior, but the schema already covers page parameters, so this is acceptable.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters like page_size and page_number, and the required organization_id is noted but not elaborated.

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 clearly states the tool lists document folders for an organization, returning names and IDs. This specificity distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate on documents, configurations, or passwords.

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 explains the credential requirement (JWT) and that API key scope does not include folder enumeration, providing important when-to-use context. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives among siblings, such as when to use list_document_sections instead.

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