drive_files_list

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 the useful behavioral detail that shared drive files are included automatically, which is beyond what annotations provide. However, it doesn't mention pagination behavior or that results may be truncated without pageSize.

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 sentences with no waste. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the shared drive note is a useful addition. Could be slightly more structured but is appropriately sized.

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 read-only list tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the essentials. However, it doesn't mention pagination behavior or that the response is a file list with nextPageToken, which an agent might need to know for complete retrieval. The shared drive inclusion note is helpful context.

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 all four parameters. The description adds the 'q' parameter context and shared drive behavior, but doesn't add meaning beyond what the schema provides for fields, orderBy, or pageSize. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('List files in Google Drive') and mentions search support via the 'q' parameter. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like drive_files_get or drive_files_download, but the listing intent is clear enough.

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 implies usage for listing files and mentions shared drive inclusion, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like drive_files_get or drive_files_download. No exclusions or alternative routing is provided.

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