search_docs

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses the query method (Drive files.list with name contains), mimeType filter, exclusion of trashed docs, OAuth scope requirement, auto-escaping of single quotes, and the absence of pagination token. This is comprehensive.

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 somewhat long but well-structured with clear sections. Each sentence adds informational value, and it avoids unnecessary fluff. It could be more concise, but it is far from wasteful.

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 tool complexity (3 params, full schema coverage, output schema exists), the description is very complete. It explains the underlying API, scope, limitations, and provides alternatives, leaving no critical gaps for an agent.

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?

The input schema covers all parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining case-insensitivity, auto-escaping, empty string behavior, and page_size cap, which goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 tool's purpose: searching Google Docs by filename substring across the user's entire Drive. It specifies the action, resource, and scope, and distinguishes from sibling tools like search_drive_files and list_docs_in_folder by explaining the underlying query method and limitations.

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 explicitly tells when to use the tool ('name-only lookups') and when not to use it ('does NOT search document content; for full-text search use search_drive_files'). It also provides alternatives for listing docs in a folder, giving clear context for selection.

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