works_perms_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action is 'List', which implies a read-only operation, but it does not mention return value, authentication needs, or any side effects. Beyond indicating scope, it offers no additional behavioral context.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes a key modifier ('with folder_id') in a parenthetical. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundant content.

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 simple list tool with no output schema, the description gives a clear overview and covers the folder_id nuance. However, it omits any mention of the 'user' parameter's role, and without an output schema, a brief return-value description would improve completeness. It is minimally adequate but has clear gaps.

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?

There are three parameters with zero schema descriptions. The description adds meaning for 'folder_id' by indicating it changes the behavior to folder-level, and implies that omitting it means drive-level. However, it does not explain 'user' or 'sharedrive_id' beyond their names, leaving some semantics implicit.

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's function: listing permissions. It specifies the scope ('drive-level or, with folder_id, folder-level'), which distinguishes it from sibling list tools for drives, files, and shared folders. The verb 'List' is specific and matches the resource type.

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 when to use this tool (when you need to list permissions) and mentions the folder_id condition for folder-level permissions. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, leaving the usage context to inference from sibling names.

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