infomaniak_list_drive_file_access_teams

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds the 'admin inventory for file permission review' framing, which is useful but does not disclose additional behaviors like pagination or list limits. No contradiction with annotations.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and no filler. Every word adds value, and the read-only/admin context is efficiently conveyed.

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 simple 2-parameter schema, strong annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It identifies the resource type, the action, and the administrative review context without needing to describe return values.

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 both parameters have clear descriptions (e.g., drive_id 'Discover via infomaniak_list_drives'). The description's 'file or folder' wording is already present in the file_id schema, so no additional parameter meaning is added.

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 states 'List team access entries for a kDrive file or folder', which is a specific verb + resource + scope. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_drive_file_access_users and list_drive_file_access_invitations by focusing on 'team access entries'.

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 phrase 'Read-only admin inventory for file permission review' gives clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the team-specific scope makes the appropriate use case obvious relative to the user/invitation siblings.

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