List iDrive devices

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently indicates a read-only listing operation and specifies the exact scope ('every device backed up under the authenticated iDrive account') and the fields included. It omits details like pagination or rate limits, but for a zero-parameter enumeration that is a minor gap.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, then appends the precise list of returned fields. Every word earns its place and there is no redundant or vague phrasing.

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 parameterless enumeration tool with an output schema present, the description is complete: it states scope, result fields, and the account context. There is nothing else an agent needs to know to invoke this tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema already fully covers parameter semantics. The description goes beyond the schema by clarifying what data is returned for each device, which is useful context even though no parameters exist.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lists') with a clear resource ('every device backed up under the authenticated iDrive account') and enumerates the exact data returned. It is immediately distinguishable from sibling file-focused tools like list_files or browse_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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when an agent needs to enumerate all backed-up devices and their basic attributes. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the device-level scope makes the intended use unambiguous given the file-centric siblings.

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