delete-drive-item-permission

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds the constraint that only non-inherited permissions can be deleted. It does not mention potential side effects (e.g., impact on sharing) or failure behavior for inherited permissions, but the annotation covers the destructive nature. The added constraint is useful context beyond the annotation.

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 very concise: a one-sentence purpose plus a clearly separated tip. It front-loads the main verb/resource and keeps the tip separate for readability. No wasted words.

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 destructive tool with complete schema documentation and a destructiveHint annotation, the description covers the essential prerequisite (finding the permission ID) and a key constraint (non-inherited). It does not explain return values, but no output schema exists, and the schema details all parameters. The information is sufficient for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, and each parameter has a detailed schema description (e.g., driveId, driveItemId, permissionId, confirm, includeHeaders). The tool description does not add any additional parameter information beyond what the schema already provides, so it earns the baseline 3 for high coverage.

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 states the exact action ('Delete a drive item permission') and clarifies it applies to a file or folder. It clearly distinguishes itself from other permission tools (like share or list) by specifying it removes an existing permission. The tip reinforces the purpose by explaining it removes a specific permission.

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 tip provides actionable guidance: use list-drive-item-permissions first to find the permission ID, and only non-inherited permissions can be deleted. This gives a clear prerequisite and a condition for use. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or when not to use this tool, but the guidance is sufficient for correct selection.

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