Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• drive_create_folderB
  3/5.0
  Behavior1/5

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

  No annotations are provided, and the description carries the full burden. It merely states the action and doesn't disclose side effects, permission requirements, or behavior in edge cases (e.g., duplicate folder names).

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence that is direct and front-loaded, with no unnecessary verbiage. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should explain more about return values or side effects, but it only provides the basic purpose. The tool is simple, but the description is not complete enough to fully inform an agent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema provides full descriptions for both parameters (name and parentId), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter context, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses the specific verb 'Create' and resource 'new folder in Google Drive', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools (list, upload, download). It clearly states the tool's function.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply states the action without any context, exclusions, or prerequisite conditions.

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

• drive_upload_text_fileB
  3/5.0
  Behavior1/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it offers none beyond the action itself. It does not mention overwrite behavior, authentication requirements, return values, or side effects.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is maximally concise and wastes no tokens.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about expected outcomes or side effects. It only states the action, leaving the agent without information about what the call returns or whether it can overwrite existing files.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema already describes all three parameters with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional semantic value. Baseline 3 applies because the schema fully covers parameter meaning.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses the specific verb 'Upload' with a clear resource ('a text file to Google Drive'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like drive_list_files, drive_create_folder, and drive_download_file.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and does not mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It simply states the action without contextual direction.

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

• drive_download_fileA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action and a key limitation (cannot download Google Docs/Sheets), but does not mention authentication, overwrite behavior, or error handling. The disclosed limitation adds some value, but more transparency would be expected.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Download a binary or regular file') and adds a parenthetical caveat. No waste.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple two-parameter download tool, the description covers the primary purpose and a critical limitation. Since there is no output schema, it could mention what happens after download (e.g., return value), but the simplicity of the tool makes this a minor gap.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100% with both parameters (fileId, destPath) already described in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific context, so the baseline of 3 applies.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description names the specific verb 'Download' and the resource 'binary or regular file from Google Drive to the local file system', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like upload or list. The note about Google Docs/Sheets further refines its scope.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides clear context by stating the tool downloads binary/regular files and explicitly warns it cannot handle Google Docs/Sheets, which implies not to use it for those. It does not name an alternative tool, but the limitation serves as a clear exclusion for some use cases.

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

• drive_list_filesA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds that pageSize has a max of 100 and that a search query can be used, but does not disclose return format, pagination behavior beyond pageSize, or whether it is read-only (though implied). This is adequate but not rich.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences, concise, and front-loaded with the main purpose. No wasted words or redundant details.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential function and parameters. It could mention the return value (e.g., file metadata) but is otherwise sufficient given the tool's straightforward nature and clear sibling context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains the parameters. The description reiterates pageSize and query without adding new meaning, which aligns with the baseline for high schema coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool lists files in Google Drive, using a specific verb and resource. It naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools (upload, create folder, download) by focusing on the read/list operation.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for listing or searching files and mentions configurable parameters (pageSize, query). It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives, but the sibling tools have obviously different purposes, so context is sufficient.

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