get_drive_file_permissions

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions 'requires the drive.readonly OAuth scope', implying read-only behavior. Could add more detail about what data is returned, but output schema exists. Good overall.

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?

Three sentences, each with purpose: states action, provides usage guidance with alternatives, and lists scope requirement. 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?

Given the presence of an output schema and complete parameter descriptions, the description adds appropriate context: purpose, usage scenario, alternatives, and auth requirement. Fully sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to use 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 coverage is 100% with descriptive parameter names and descriptions. Description does not add new parameter details but reinforces usage context (file_id from search_drive_files or shareable URL). Meets baseline.

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?

Clearly states it 'inspects' permissions and public-link status of a Drive file. Distinguishes from siblings like set_drive_file_permissions and check_drive_file_public_access by explicitly naming them for alternative actions.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to audit who can access a file before sharing externally.' Provides clear alternatives: set_drive_file_permissions or manage_drive_access for changing, check_drive_file_public_access for quick check. Also mentions required OAuth scope.

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