drive_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description usefully discloses non-obvious behavior: it scrolls and de-duplicates, switches grid view to list view, and produces indexes usable by other drive tools. It does not describe permissions, rate limits, or exact return structure, but the core behavioral traits for a listing operation are covered.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by concise behavioral notes and downstream index usage. Every sentence contributes useful information without repetition or filler.

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 four-parameter listing tool with full schema descriptions but no annotations or output schema, the description covers purpose, paging-related behavior, de-duplication, view switching, and index usability. It leaves some gaps around explicit sibling selection and detailed return values, but is otherwise complete enough to invoke 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already defines path, limit, start, and section in detail. The description adds little parameter-specific semantics beyond implying folder/section alternatives and index usability, so baseline 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List the items of the current Drive location (folder, section or search results).' It clearly scopes the tool to listing Drive contents, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as drive_search or drive_view.

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?

Usage is implied by 'current Drive location' and the optional path/section overrides, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus alternatives like drive_search. It does mention that resulting indexes are usable by drive.cd, drive.info, drive.download, and drive.read_text, which helps orient the agent.

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