drive_share_leave

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

The annotation destructiveHint=true already signals destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context by explaining that the action only removes your access and does not affect the owner or other members. It also notes authentication requirements, providing transparency beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and each sentence earns its place by adding either the action, exclusions, or alternative tool guidance. No unnecessary information is present.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, exclusions, and behavioral effects. It also distinguishes from the most relevant sibling (drive_share_revoke), making the context complete without needing additional details.

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%, and the parameter 'path' is already well-documented in the schema with format and example. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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 clearly states the action: 'Leave a Proton Drive folder that was shared with you by another user.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool drive_share_revoke, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance (for folders shared with you) and when-not-to-use guidance (do not use on folders you own; use drive_share_revoke instead). It also names the alternative tool, giving clear context for selecting this tool over others.

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