organize_drive

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It describes the general organizing action but fails to mention that the default execute=false makes it a dry run, and it omits side effects like moving files or creating folders. This is critical for a mutating tool, leaving the agent without safety information.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with zero extraneous detail. Every word 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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it explains the organizing action and the categories. The crucial dry-run default is not mentioned in the description but is fully covered by the schema, so the overall tool definition is sufficient.

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 provides a complete description for the 'execute' parameter, including the dry-run behavior (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action (organize), the resource (Google Drive files), and the method (by type) with examples (Documents, Images, Videos). It distinguishes from sibling tools such as organize_photos_by_date, which focuses on photos by date.

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 the tool is for organizing Drive files by type, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over sibling tools or mention any exclusions/alternatives. There is no direct comparison to organize_photos_by_date or archive_old_files, leaving usage context implicit.

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