List Recent OneDrive Items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does add useful context by specifying that results are scoped to the signed-in user and filtered by recency. However, it does not disclose limitations such as whether only metadata is returned, how 'recent' is defined, or that this is a read-only operation beyond the verb 'List.'

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 primary sentence is a crisp, front-loaded definition of the tool's purpose. The Chinese intent variants add multilingual guidance without significant bloat, keeping the overall description compact and easy to scan.

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 single-parameter, read-only list tool, the description covers the essential semantics: resource, scope, and recency. With no output schema, it would be slightly stronger to describe the returned item shape, but the low complexity makes the current text reasonably complete.

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 only parameter, `top`, is fully documented in the schema with the description 'Number of recent items to return,' providing 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 begins with the specific verb 'List,' identifies the resource as 'files,' and clearly scopes it to 'recently used by the signed-in user,' which matches the title. This distinguishes it from related tools like drive_list_root, drive_list_children, and drive_search_items.

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 'recently used by the signed-in user' provides a clear retrieval context, making it apparent when this tool should be selected. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion cases, but the context is unambiguous and sufficient for a simple list operation.

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