drive_list_folder

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it discloses nothing beyond the basic action. It does not clarify whether listing returns immediate children only, includes subfolders, how pagination/max_results behaves, or what permissions are needed.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool, although it is sparse enough to border on under-specification.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is covered elsewhere. However, the description leaves behavioral gaps—recursive vs. immediate listing, inclusion of files vs. subfolders, and max_results semantics—making it minimally viable with clear gaps.

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 0%, and the description fails to compensate by explaining folder_id or max_results. Although the parameter names and defaults in the schema are reasonably self-explanatory, the description adds no meaning beyond the bare function statement.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('contents of a Drive folder'), precisely stating the tool's function. The verb and resource distinguish it from sibling tools like drive_search (searching across Drive) and drive_read_file (reading a file's content).

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 provides no usage guidance, offering only a bare statement of function. It does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like drive_search, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions.

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