Get File Metadata

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only and idempotent. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as what metadata fields are returned or any rate limits.

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 without unnecessary words, achieving conciseness. However, it is slightly too terse and could provide more context without sacrificing brevity.

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 reduces the need to explain return values. However, given the tool has multiple parameters and many siblings, the description lacks contextual guidance on parameter usage (e.g., when to specify 'user_google_email') and fails to differentiate from similar tools.

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 description only mentions the 'ID' parameter implicitly, ignoring the 'user_google_email' parameter entirely. With only 50% schema description coverage, the description fails to clarify the purpose or usage of the missing parameter.

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 specifies the action ('Returns metadata') and the resource ('single Google Drive file by ID'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like copy, create, or list operations.

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 usage for retrieving metadata but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like 'list_drive_items' or 'read_file_content'. No exclusions or context are given.

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