get_drive_shareable_link

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the return value but does not clarify whether obtaining a shareable link might modify sharing settings or require specific permissions. The description also omits any potential side effects, making it insufficient for an agent to anticipate the operation's impact.

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 concise, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and structured with clear Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is informative, with no fluff or 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?

For a simple tool with two string parameters, the description covers the core context: purpose, parameter meanings, and return value. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return structure. However, it lacks explicit behavioral side-effect disclosure and usage context, which prevents a perfect score.

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 has zero description coverage, and the description compensates by explaining both parameters: 'user_google_email' as the user's Google email address and 'file_id' as the ID of the file/folder. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema fields, although it does not provide format constraints or edge-case behavior.

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 states a clear, specific action: 'Gets the shareable link for a Google Drive file or folder.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_drive_file_download_url (download URL) and share_drive_file (modifying sharing permissions) by focusing on the shareable link concept.

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 implies usage from its purpose (use this to retrieve a shareable link) but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose it over alternatives. There is no mention of alternatives, exclusions, or contextual prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer based on the tool name and purpose.

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