drive_comments_list

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe, read-only nature is covered. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond that—no mention of pagination, required fields, deleted comments, or that replies are separate.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It states the verb and object directly and is appropriately sized for such a simple list operation.

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 description is minimally viable: with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, an agent can likely invoke it correctly. However, there is no output schema and the description does not mention pagination behavior, the required fields parameter, or the boundary between comments and replies, leaving some context for the agent to infer.

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 schema provides 100% description coverage for all six parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but it does not need to compensate for missing schema documentation.

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 the operation ('List') and the resource ('comments on a file'). It does not explicitly distinguish this from drive_comments_get or drive_replies_list, but the verb and object alone are unambiguous enough among the siblings.

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 about when to use this tool versus drive_comments_get (single comment), drive_comments_create/update/delete, or drive_replies_list. The sibling list exists in the context, but the description itself offers no exclusions or routing hints.

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