Get a Drive file’s details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description explicitly restates 'Read-only' (consistent, not contradictory). It adds value beyond annotations by listing the metadata fields returned, which helps the agent anticipate the response shape even without an output schema.

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 sentences with zero filler: the first states the action and return fields, the second gives the parameter source and read-only nature. It is front-loaded and every sentence 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?

For a simple read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers the return fields and parameter origin. Annotations handle the safety profile. Nothing the agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

The schema already provides a description for fileId, and the description adds the crucial origin hint ('from list_drive_files'), which is not in the schema. This gives the agent actionable context for obtaining a valid value.

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 a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('one Drive file's metadata'), and enumerates the exact fields returned (name, type, size, modified time, webViewLink, webContentLink). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like list_drive_files (which lists many) and update/delete_drive_file (which mutate).

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?

It provides a clear source for the parameter ('Pass fileId (from list_drive_files)'), which acts as an explicit usage hint. It doesn't explicitly list when not to use, but the purpose is unambiguous and there is no competing sibling for single-file retrieval.

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