docs_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'List' implies a safe read operation and it discloses the returned fields, which adds real value in the absence of an output schema, but it says nothing about permissions, account-scoping behavior, or pagination/rate limits.

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 tight sentences with zero filler; the mode split is front-loaded and the return fields are stated compactly. Appropriately sized for a three-parameter read tool.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates return fields (titles, ids, owners, modified dates), and account/query semantics live in a fully-covered schema. An agent has enough to invoke it correctly, though permission and result-count behavior remain unstated.

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 limit, query, and account including the multi-account use case. The description restates the query behavior but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (Google Docs) and disentangles two modes: recent documents vs. Drive search when a query is given. It does not explicitly name sibling tools (docs_read, docs_open), but the list-vs-read distinction is inferable.

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 query parameter's behavior implies when each mode runs ('Omit for recently opened documents'), giving usable context. However, no explicit when-to-use guidance relative to siblings like docs_read or docs_open is provided.

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