drive_files_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'Get a file's metadata' but does not explain error handling (e.g., missing file), required permissions, or whether the operation is idempotent. The minimal description fails to convey important constraints beyond the basic operation.

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, no fluff. Purpose is front-loaded, and the shared drive clarification is added efficiently. Every word serves a purpose.

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 tool is simple (get metadata by ID), but the description omits details about default return fields or how to use the 'fields' parameter. Without an output schema, more guidance on what to expect would improve completeness. However, given the low complexity, it is minimally adequate.

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%, with both parameters (fileId and fields) described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning or guidance beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 retrieves a file's metadata by ID, using specific verb 'Get' and resource 'file's metadata'. It also explicitly notes support for shared drive files, distinguishing it from siblings like drive_files_list or drive_files_download.

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 provides clear context for use: when you need metadata by file ID. The note about shared drive support clarifies compatibility. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use (e.g., for downloading use drive_files_download) or alternatives.

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