get-drive

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe, read-only, idempotent operation, so the description carries little additional burden. It adds a small clarifying detail by calling drive a 'document library', but no further behavioral traits such as authorization requirements, scope limitations, or response characteristics are disclosed.

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 a single focused sentence with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the action and resource, and the parenthetical clarification is concise and useful.

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 low complexity, single required parameter with full schema coverage, and annotations that establish the safe read-only nature, the description is complete enough for an agent to correctly select and invoke this tool. No output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not expected here.

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% for the single driveId parameter, so the schema already documents it. The description does not add any semantic detail beyond restating that the operation is by id, which is appropriate for the high coverage baseline.

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 'Get a drive (document library) by id' uses a specific verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('drive'), and clarifies the domain term with 'document library'. The 'by id' qualifier distinguishes it from related tools like get-my-drive, which retrieves the current user's drive without an id.

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 does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage when a driveId is available, but it does not mention get-my-drive, list-site-drives, or other sibling tools, nor does it explain why a user would prefer this tool over them.

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