gdrive_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the search is by name ('theo tên'), which is a key behavioral trait, and implies a read-only operation. However, it does not describe result format, ordering, or whether only IELTS files are returned or if the query filters among all files.

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 that includes the verb, resource, and scope with no wasted words. It is concise and easy to parse.

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 presence of an output schema and full parameter descriptions covers invocation needs, but the description lacks usage guidance and explicit differentiation from sibling search/list tools. It is adequate for a simple search but not comprehensive in guiding tool selection.

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 coverage is 100% with both query and max_results having descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the 'by name' scope, which aligns with the query parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema fully documents the parameters.

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 the specific verb 'Tìm kiếm' (search), names the resource 'file IELTS trên Drive' (IELTS files on Drive), and specifies the scope 'theo tên' (by name). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like gdrive_list_files (listing all files) and search_documents (possibly broader search).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_documents or gdrive_list_files. It does not mention exclusions, preconditions, or scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate.

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