gdrive_create_doc

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It transparently states this creates a new file and that the default is a Google Doc, which is useful. However, it does not explain what happens when folder_id is omitted, whether existing files could be affected, or any permission/authorization requirements.

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 only two sentences and every sentence earns its place: first states the core action, then clarifies the default type, then gives the key alternative. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 description covers the core creation action and the two main document types, and an output schema exists so return-value details are not needed. However, with four undocumented optional parameters and no explanation of folder placement or content behavior, an agent may still make incomplete or incorrect calls.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for all four parameters. It only explains mime_type by giving the default and the spreadsheet value. Title, content, and folder_id are left entirely to inference from their names, with no explanation of how they are used or how they interact with the created file.

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 creates a new file in Google Drive, uses the specific verb 'Create', and identifies the resource. It also distinguishes the default Google Doc behavior and how to switch to Sheets, which differentiates it from sibling tools like gdrive_update_doc, gdrive_list_files, and gdrive_read_file.

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 gives clear context for use: creating a new file, with a default type and an explicit way to request a spreadsheet. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the create-versus-read/update/list distinction among siblings is largely implied.

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