import_to_google_doc

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

Discloses conversion behavior (preserves formatting), server-side processing, and required OAuth scope. Lacks details on file disposition (original file kept/deleted) but covers key behavioral traits beyond annotations (none provided).

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with main purpose. Every sentence adds value: conversion description, use case guidance, sibling differentiation, and 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?

With 7 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and key behaviors. It does not detail return values (handled by output schema) but provides sufficient context for a conversion 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 baseline is 3. Description adds value by noting mutual exclusivity of content/file_path/file_url (though already in schema) and providing safety context for file_path ('Path safety validated') and file_url ('SSRF-protected with size limits').

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?

Description clearly states 'Convert a source file into a native Google Doc on upload' with specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like create_drive_file and insert_doc_markdown/insert_doc_elements.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Use this (not create_drive_file) when you want a real Google Doc editable in the web UI. For adding content to an existing Doc use insert_doc_markdown or insert_doc_elements.' Clearly states when and when not to use.

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