List a Drive folder

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying the listing order ('sub-folders first'), which an agent would not otherwise know.

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?

Two short sentences carry the core behavior, the root handling, and the main sibling alternative. Every sentence earns its place, and the primary action is front-loaded.

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?

For a simple non-destructive listing tool with fully documented parameterschers, the description is mostly complete. It could be slightly stronger by mentioning what the returned entries look like, but since no output schema is present and the tool name/title make the listing nature clear, the gap is minor.

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 100%, so the schema already documents account, folder_id, and max_results. The description's note about omitting folder_id for the root essentially restates the schema's default-to-root behavior, adding no new parameter meaning.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('what is inside a folder'), and even states the traversal order ('sub-folders first'). It clearly distinguishes itself from drive_search by contrasting the use case, so an agent can tell this is the enumeration tool for a known folder.

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 gives explicit guidance: omit folder_id for root, and use drive_search when you know what you are looking for but not where it lives. This directly tells the agent when to use this tool and when to prefer a sibling tool.

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