source_list_drive

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It implies a read-only listing operation but does not explicitly state it is safe or discuss side effects. The behavior is fairly clear, but lacks explicit safety declaration.

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?

Very concise: two sentences plus parameter list. Every part earns its place with no wasted words.

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 an output schema exists (not shown), no need to document return values. The description covers purpose, usage context, and parameter semantics adequately for a simple list tool. Could clarify what happens when skip_freshness is false, but minor.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It provides minimal semantics: 'notebook_id: Notebook UUID' (most basic), and 'skip_freshness: If True, skip per-source freshness checks for faster listing' adds value beyond the schema. Still, improvement is marginal.

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 'List sources with types and Drive freshness status', which is a specific verb (list) and resource (sources) with scope (types and freshness). It distinguishes from sibling tools like source_sync_drive.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use before source_sync_drive to identify stale sources', providing clear when-to-use guidance and referencing an alternative sibling tool.

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