List files in a drive

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, it discloses that object IDs are regenerated on every call and must not be used for certain operations, and describes recursion defaults and pagination. This adds essential behavioral context that annotations do not cover.

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 purpose, then parameter requirement, return values, and an important caveat about object ID stability. Each sentence carries critical information without redundancies, making it concise yet comprehensive.

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 listing tool with no output schema, the description covers return fields, pagination, recursion, bucket requirements, and a critical ID instability warning with explicit alternative tools. This is a thorough and self-contained context.

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 input schema already fully describes all three parameters (100% coverage), including defaults and required-conditions. The description mentions the bucket requirement and recursion default but adds no additional parameter-level detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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 files from storage, recursively by default, and explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it is 'the most reliable way to see what a drive actually contains' and by contrasting with search_files/browse_folder/recent_files for stable IDs.

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?

It provides clear usage context ('most reliable way to see what a drive actually contains') and gives explicit alternative tools for stable StorageId use. It lacks a broader 'when not to use' statement, but the guidance is specific enough for an agent to make a reasonable choice.

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