manage_drive_file

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

Without annotations, the description reveals that move and delete return a task_id, and that the 'type' parameter is mandatory to avoid Feishu errors. However, it does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, or error scenarios beyond the mention of error codes.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the essential purpose and action types. It efficiently packs critical information (required type, return values) without redundancy.

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 tool with 5 parameters and 3 actions, the description covers actions, required params per action, return behavior (task_id), and an important error detail. There is no output schema, but return values are mentioned. It could elaborate on the copy action's result (e.g., returns new file token), but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 schema covers all parameters (100% coverage). The description adds valuable semantics: it explains that 'name' is required for copy, 'folder_token' required for move (optional for copy), and that 'type' must always be provided. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 explicitly states it manages Drive files with three actions (copy, move, delete) and emphasizes the mandatory 'type' parameter. It distinguishes from sibling tools like copy_wiki_node or delete_wiki_node, but could be more specific about the exact resource scope.

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 when to use the tool (for copy, move, delete operations) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives. The context of sibling tools provides some implicit guidance, but no direct usage recommendations are given.

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