Search Google Drive

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., rate limits, auth requirements, result limits) that goes beyond the annotations. It is adequate but not enhanced.

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 is extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and then provide actionable guidance on parameter choice. No wasted words; every sentence 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?

Despite having 7 optional parameters and an output schema, the description only highlights mime_type and query. It omits other search-scoping parameters (corpora, drive_id, include_items_from_all_drives) and pagination (page_size), leaving the agent without key context for constructing a complete search. For a tool with this complexity, the description is too sparse.

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 baseline is 3. The description reiterates the usage of mime_type and query parameters but does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., the query parameter description already explains the empty-to-search-all behavior). No value over schema.

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 verb 'search' and the resource 'Google Drive files'. It distinguishes between two modes of filtering (simple mime_type filtering and advanced query language), making it easy for an agent to understand the tool's purpose relative to siblings like search_docs or list_drive_items.

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 guidance on when to use the mime_type parameter for simple filtering versus the query parameter for advanced searches. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use this tool (e.g., for listing all files without a search term) or compare to alternatives among sibling tools.

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