list_drives

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds only that includeArchived defaults to false, which is already in the schema. No new behavioral insights are provided, nor are there any contradictions.

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?

The description consists of two short, front-loaded sentences. Every sentence adds value: the first states the purpose, and the second provides usage context and a critical default. There is no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the tool's primary use case and a key default. However, it misses potential details about pagination via the limit parameter, though the schema specifies the default and maximum.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond what is already in the schema's parameter descriptions (e.g., query trimming, includeArchived default, limit maximum).

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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: 'List Huly Drive spaces.' It is a specific verb+resource, clearly distinguishing it from other list tools in the sibling set. The additional context about using it before path operations further clarifies its role.

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 usage guidance: 'Use this before path operations when you do not know the exact drive id or exact drive name.' This tells the agent when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives (e.g., get_drive when the ID is known).

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