works_sharedfolders_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It does disclose the delegated user requirement, which is useful auth/behavioral context. However, it does not describe response format, pagination, or error behavior, leaving gaps for a read operation without annotations.

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, clear sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and key requirement. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 one parameter, the description covers the essential purpose and the delegated-user prerequisite. While there is no output schema, the return type (list of folders) is reasonably implied, but no explicit mention of return details prevents a 5.

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 schema provides only a bare 'user' parameter with no description. The description clarifies that the user must be a member and must be a delegated user, adding meaning that compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 a member's 'shared with me' folders, specifying the resource type (shared folders) and scope (member's). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like works_drives_list (which presumably lists all drives) and works_files_list (which lists files).

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 mentions the prerequisite that the member must be a delegated user, providing some usage context. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so usage is implied rather than clearly guided.

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