works_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action and provides an example of a filter parameter, but does not disclose return format, pagination, permissions, whether it is read-only, or any side effects. This is a significant gap.

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 core function. The parenthetical example adds useful context without redundancy. However, it is slightly under-structured—a brief list of parameters would improve usability without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

Given three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this one-line description is grossly insufficient. It does not explain how the search works, what is returned, or how filters and other parameters interact. An agent would have to guess most of the tool's behavior and parameter semantics.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only explains drive_type_filters with an example ('SHARE_DRIVE'), leaving the required 'query' and optional 'user' parameters completely unexplained. This is inadequate for an agent to understand how to fill the parameters correctly.

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 purpose: 'Search drive files' with a specific verb and resource. It also includes an example filter, which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like works_files_list and works_drive_get, making the intended function unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or which sibling tools are more appropriate in certain scenarios. The example filter hints at usage but does not constitute clear guidance for tool selection.

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