get_drive_shareable_link

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States 'Read-only — does NOT change sharing' to clarify non-destructiveness, and mentions required OAuth scope. Lacks details about error handling or response structure, but output schema may cover that. Still good transparency for a read tool.

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 adds distinct value: purpose, behavior with alternatives, and required scope. No filler, properly front-loaded.

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 moderate complexity (2 params, output schema, no enums), the description covers purpose, behavior, alternatives, and scope. Additional details on return format are not needed due to output schema. Complete for a simple read 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%, so parameters are fully described in schema. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Hence baseline score of 3.

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 'Fetch the webViewLink and current permissions for a Drive item.' Identifies specific resource and verb, and distinguishes from sibling tools like manage_drive_access and get_drive_file_permissions by stating it is read-only.

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 'Read-only — does NOT change sharing. To modify sharing use manage_drive_access. For a fuller permissions audit use get_drive_file_permissions. Requires the drive.readonly OAuth scope.' Provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance with alternatives and prerequisites.

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