Google Workspace MCP VE

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'access' but doesn't specify permission requirements, authentication needs, rate limits, pagination behavior, or return format. For a listing tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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?

Single sentence with zero waste - every word contributes to the core purpose. Efficiently front-loaded with the main action and resource.

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 values don't need description. However, for a listing tool with no annotations, the description should address more behavioral aspects like sorting, filtering capabilities, or error conditions. It's minimally adequate but lacks context about how the listing works.

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 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides (user_google_email requirement, max_results default). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Lists') and resource ('spreadsheets from Google Drive') with scope ('that the user has access to'). It distinguishes from general file listing tools like 'list_drive_items' by specifying spreadsheets only, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'get_spreadsheet_info' which might retrieve metadata for a specific spreadsheet.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_docs_in_folder' for documents or 'search_drive_files' for filtered searches. The description implies it's for listing accessible spreadsheets but doesn't mention prerequisites, limitations, or comparison to sibling tools.

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