search_drive_files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies read-only behavior ('Searches'), describes the return format, and includes a note on efficient parameter usage. It does not explicitly state that it does not modify data, but the verb 'searches' is clear enough.

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 concise and well-structured, with a clear opening sentence followed by bullet-point parameter explanations and a return value description. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy.

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's complexity (6 parameters, optional shared drive support) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the purpose, all parameters with behaviors, and the return format. It is fully self-contained for an AI agent to use correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains each parameter in detail: user_google_email is required, query supports Google Drive operators, page_size defaults to 10, drive_id and corpora have nuanced behavior, and include_items_from_all_drives is explained. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 it searches for files and folders within Google Drive, including shared drives. The verb 'searches' is specific, and the resource 'files and folders within Google Drive' distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_drive_items (which lists without search) and get_drive_file_content (which retrieves content).

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 provides detailed guidance on parameter usage, such as when to use drive_id versus corpora, and suggests preferring 'user' or 'drive' over 'allDrives' for efficiency. However, it does not explicitly compare against alternative tools (e.g., list_drive_items) for when to search versus list.

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