drive_upload_text_file

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. It only states 'Upload a text file to Google Drive' and does not explain potential side effects, such as whether existing files are overwritten, required permissions, or what the response contains. This is insufficient for a mutating operation.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It effectively conveys the core purpose without unnecessary detail, which is appropriate for a simple upload tool.

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?

The tool is simple and the schema fully documents the parameters, making invocation straightforward. However, the description lacks behavioral context that annotations would normally provide, such as mutational effects and return behavior. It is minimally viable but not complete.

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 has 100% description coverage, with each parameter (name, content, parentId) already explained. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Upload' and resource 'text file to Google Drive', clearly indicating the action and object. It also distinguishes this tool from its siblings (list, create folder, download) by focusing on the upload action.

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 implies the tool is used when a text file needs to be uploaded to Google Drive, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or mention any exclusions. No alternative tools are referenced.

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