Browse SharePoint Drives (Deprecated)

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

Annotations already mark the tool as readOnly, openWorld, and idempotent. The description adds the deprecation status, which is valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations. However, it does not elaborate on return format or auth requirements.

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 exceptionally concise, using one short sentence plus a deprecation marker. Every word serves a purpose, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

Despite the simple interface, the description lacks important context: it is deprecated but offers no alternative, and it does not describe what the tool returns (e.g., a list of drive IDs/names). Given the presence of sibling browse tools, the description is minimally adequate but has clear gaps.

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?

Both parameters (site_url and credential_id) are fully described in the schema with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so baseline 3 applies.

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 the tool browses drives within a SharePoint site, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like browse_sites and browse_children. The deprecated marker adds context without confusion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The deprecated status is noted but no replacement tool is suggested, leaving agents to guess. This is a significant gap.

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