list_files

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

Description discloses that the tool is read-only (consistent with annotations), returns a JSON array with specific fields (id, name, mimeType), and guides the agent to pass the id to read_file. This adds valuable behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation.

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 with two main sentences plus a sentence about return format. It is front-loaded with purpose and usage, with no extraneous words.

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 4 parameters (none required), an output schema, and annotations, the description covers purpose, return format, and usage guidance. It does not delve into edge cases, but the schema and output schema provide the rest. It is complete enough for agent selection and invocation.

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%, so the baseline is 3. However, the description adds extra context: folder_id comes from list_folders, and recursive is recommended when folder_id is set. This adds meaning beyond the schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'List files in the target Google Drive folders' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by saying 'Use this to discover files before reading them' and mentions read_file, which is a sibling. This provides clear differentiation.

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 says 'Use this to discover files before reading them,' which gives a clear use case. It does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives to sibling tools like search_content, but the context is adequate for selection.

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