drive_files_export

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns JSON with export metadata, which is useful, but it doesn't disclose details like whether the export is asynchronous, size limits, or what happens with unsupported formats. With annotations covering the read-only nature, a 3 is appropriate.

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 sentences with no waste. The core action is front-loaded, and the alternative tool is mentioned in the second sentence. Every word earns its place.

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 two-parameter read-only export tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is nearly complete. It could mention that the returned JSON contains a download URL or similar, but the output schema is absent and the description says 'export metadata,' which is sufficient for an agent to understand the return value.

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 both parameters. The description adds the context that the file is a Google Workspace file and that mimeType is the export format, but it doesn't add meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is correct.

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 tool exports a Google Workspace file (Doc, Sheet, Slide) to a specific format, and explicitly distinguishes it from drive_files_download. The verb 'Export' plus the resource and format scope make the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly says to use drive_files_download for automatic export with content returned inline, which tells the agent when to choose the alternative. This is a clear when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use distinction.

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