List trashed documents

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety burden is covered. The description adds useful output semantics by stating that deletion and purge dates are returned, going beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence that states the resource and the key returned fields without wasted words. It is efficient, though phrased as a noun phrase rather than a full verb-led sentence.

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 read-only list tool with 100% documented parameters and strong safety annotations, the description is sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool returns. The lack of an output schema is partially compensated by naming the important fields, though the overall response envelope is not described.

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?

All five parameters have detailed descriptions in the input schema, so the schema carries the parameter-level meaning. The tool description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond establishing the trash-list context, which is consistent with the 100% schema coverage baseline.

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 title supplies the verb 'List' and the description identifies the exact resource: trashed documents. It also names distinguishing output fields (deletion date and purge date), which helps separate it from restore_from_trash and empty_trash, though no sibling is explicitly called out.

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 the tool is meant for viewing trash contents and conveys the relevant use case through the deleted/purge date detail. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives such as restore_from_trash or empty_trash are mentioned.

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