drive_export_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It lacks information on side effects like file overwriting, permission requirements, failure modes, or rate limits. The description is minimal beyond the conversion action.

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 single, well-structured sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and resource, and provides examples in parentheses, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 3 well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but misses potential details such as error behavior, file size limits, or required permissions, which would enhance completeness.

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% with each parameter having a description. The tool description adds context about the source file type (Google Workspace native), but does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond the schema for individual parameters. Baseline score applies.

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 specifies the action ('Export'), the resource ('Google Workspace file'), and the purpose ('to a different format'), including examples of source and target formats, making it highly specific and distinguishable from siblings like drive_download_file.

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 when converting native Google Docs, Sheets, or Slides to other formats, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like drive_download_file for non-conversion downloads or drive_read for reading. It provides context but no exclusions.

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