infomaniak_manage_drive_private_directory

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

The description discloses two-phase confirmation with a fresh settings snapshot and that null removes the limit. This adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), explaining the confirmation workflow and null semantics.

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: the first states the primary purpose, the second adds essential behavioral details. No filler, front-loaded, and every word 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?

Given the moderate complexity and existence of an output schema, the description covers the core action, null behavior, and confirmation mechanism. It omits details on the confirmation token acquisition and snapshot meaning, but the annotations and output schema reduce the burden. Overall, it is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 coverage is only 33% (drive_id has a description). The description clarifies that size_threshold is the maximum allowed size and null removes the limit, and it hints at confirmation_token via 'two-phase confirmation.' However, it does not fully explain how the confirmation token is obtained or how the snapshot works, so it only partially compensates for the low schema coverage.

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 'Update the maximum allowed size of kDrive private folders,' specifying the exact action, resource, and scope. It distinguishes this tool from broader drive management siblings by focusing on the private folder size limit.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or alternative tool guidance. The purpose makes it clear it is for updating private folder size limits, but it does not mention when to use it versus similar tools like manage_drive_settings, leaving usage implied rather than explicit.

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