google_api_call

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it returns JSON only and is subject to the same write-control policy as named tools. This covers mutation risk and response format, though it could mention rate limits or scopes.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences deliver purpose, usage, and key constraints without wasted words. The lead sentence is immediately informative and the structure front-loads the core action.

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 no output schema and a generic catch-all tool, the description covers the essential context: how to discover methods, what to avoid (binary/file content), and the write-control policy. It could note that returns are structured JSON for read methods, but the provided guidance is adequate for a tool of this complexity.

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 parameters are fully documented. The description adds value by explaining that pathParams fill {placeholders} in the method path and that queryParams support arrays for repeated params. It does not repeat per-parameter details, appropriately deferring to the 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 invokes any Google Workspace REST method by Discovery id, explicitly framing it as an escape hatch for operations without a dedicated tool. It distinguishes itself from named tools and directs users to google_api_search for method discovery.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'escape hatch for operations without a dedicated tool' and 'Find methods with google_api_search first.' It also names alternatives (drive_download/drive_export) for specific cases and notes the write-control policy.

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