gws.drive.list_folder

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. Description adds meaningful behavioral details: non-recursive, returns specific fields, and root default. This exceeds the bare annotation coverage without contradicting it.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, then return details and a usage tip. Efficient and well-structured with 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, the description plus schema and annotations provide a complete picture: what it does, what it returns, how to access root, and safety profile. No output schema is needed because the return fields are explicitly described.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds slight value by explaining the root-default behavior of folderId, but this is already present in the schema ('default: root'). No significant extra meaning beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states the action (list) and the target resource (files/subfolders in a Drive folder), with specific scope (non-recursive). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like gws.drive.search and gws.drive.read_file by the semantics of direct listing.

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?

Provides clear context on how to use the tool (omit folderId for root) but does not explicitly discuss when not to use it or recommend alternatives. The nature of the tool makes the intended use obvious, but explicit exclusions would strengthen it.

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