list_drive_folders

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

The description is very brief and does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic action. With no annotations provided, the description should cover aspects like recursion (top-level only or nested), shared folders, rate limits, or authentication requirements. None are mentioned.

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 short sentence, which is concise. However, given the lack of annotations and multiple parameters, it could be expanded to include more context without becoming verbose. Still, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

The description omits important context such as what the return value looks like (list of folder objects or just IDs), pagination behavior (despite a limit parameter), and how to handle potential errors. With no output schema, the description should provide more detail for full utility.

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% for all three parameters (user_id, query, limit). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; 'optional filtering' is a vague restatement of the query parameter. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('folders'), and the scope ('in the user's Google Drive'). It also mentions optional filtering, which hints at the query parameter. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_drive_files (which lists all files) and create/delete folder tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not state that to list all files (including non-folders), one should use list_drive_files instead. The agent must infer usage from context.

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