gdrive_read_large_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions streaming support, byte-range capabilities, and file-type limitations. While it doesn't describe return format or auth requirements, these are less critical for a read operation and the core behaviors are sufficiently transparent.

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, front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by usage guidance and exclusions. Every sentence contributes meaningful information with no redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description should explain return behavior. It does not state what the tool returns (e.g., raw bytes, stream, or decoded text). While usage and limitations are covered, the missing return-value explanation creates a gap for an AI agent invoking the tool.

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% with descriptive text for each parameter. The description adds context about streaming and byte ranges but does not provide additional parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already defines. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool reads large files (>20MB) from Google Drive with streaming and byte-range support. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool gdrive_read_file by explicitly referencing size limits and partial reading.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this for partial file reading or when gdrive_read_file fails due to size limits.' Also states exclusions: 'Not suitable for Google Docs/Sheets or files requiring text extraction.' This clearly delineates usage vs alternatives.

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