files_list_recent

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc.), the description adds return field specifics ('Returns id, name, drive id and web URL'), ordering behavior ('most recent first'), and a permission requirement ('Requires Files.Read'). This contextualizes the tool's behavior and authentication needs without contradicting the annotations.

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 two sentences: the first states the core behavior and return format, the second provides usage context and sibling alternatives. It is front-loaded with the primary action and contains no redundant information.

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 list tool with no required parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it specifies the returned fields, ordering, use case, permission requirement, and how it differs from related tools. Nothing essential 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 input schema already fully describes the single parameter max_results with 'Maximum recently accessed files to return.' The description does not add parameter-level details, but with 100% schema coverage, the baseline 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 uses a specific verb+resource+scope: 'List files the signed-in user has recently opened or edited, most recent first.' It clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like files_search and files_list_trending, making its unique role unambiguous.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('Use for the document I was working on yesterday') and contrasts it with alternatives ('files_search is better when the name or a keyword is known, and files_list_trending covers what colleagues are working on'). This provides clear decision criteria.

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