update_drive_permission

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses behavioral nuances: role is optional and unchanged if omitted, and expiration_time has a specific format and purpose. It does not mention auth requirements or error conditions, but for an update operation the core behavior is well articulated.

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 a well-structured docstring: a one-sentence purpose statement, then per-parameter details, and a return type. Every sentence is informative and there is no fluff or repetition of the schema.

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?

All five parameters are described with required markers and examples, and the return type is specified. It lacks guidance on when to prefer this tool over remove_drive_permission or share_drive_file, and does not mention side effects or prerequisites, but overall it provides enough information for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must fully compensate. It provides explicit meaning for every parameter, including valid role values ('reader', 'commenter', 'writer'), a format example for expiration_time, and a cross-reference to get_drive_file_permissions for permission_id. This adds significant value beyond the bare 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?

The description clearly states the tool updates an existing permission on a Google Drive file or folder, distinguishing it from siblings like remove_drive_permission or transfer_drive_ownership. It also references get_drive_file_permissions, linking to the source of permission IDs.

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 context by stating it updates an existing permission and points to get_drive_file_permissions for the permission_id. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, but the context is clear enough for an agent to choose appropriately.

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