drive_list_folder

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

No annotations are provided, and the description is extremely brief. It does not disclose important behaviors such as the default folder_id='root', the pagination via max_results, whether the listing is recursive, or error handling. The description fails to carry the full transparency burden in the absence of annotations.

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, concise sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core purpose, making it appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 listing tool, the description is minimal but leaves out key invocation details such as parameter defaults, result scope, and behavior limits. With no annotations to fill gaps and no parameter guidance, the agent has insufficient context to reliably select and call this tool among many Drive-related siblings.

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 0% for two parameters, and the description does not mention folder_id or max_results at all. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no semantic value to help the agent understand their purpose or syntax 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 lists folder contents with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like drive_search and drive_read_file by focusing on enumerating children of a specified folder.

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 when to use the tool (when you need folder contents) but provides no explicit alternatives or exclusions. There is no mention of drive_search for broader queries or how to handle large folders, leaving usage context only weakly implied.

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