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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses only the last-tab restriction, but lacks information about irreversibility, permission requirements, or effects on related data. For a destructive operation, 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 one concise sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, followed by a critical constraint. No wasted words; every element earns its place.

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 2-parameter delete tool, the description is adequate but incomplete. It includes the key last-tab restriction but omits other important context such as permanence, permissions, and behavior when deletion fails. The absence of an output schema means return values are not explained, though that is not strictly required.

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% for both parameters ('Tab ID' and 'Sheet (workbook) ID'). The description adds minimal semantic context by clarifying that 'sheet' means spreadsheet, but does not elaborate on parameter formats or relationships. Baseline 3 applies as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specifies the action ('Delete') and resource ('a tab from a spreadsheet'), with helpful synonyms in parentheses. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_sheet (which would delete the entire spreadsheet) and other delete tools. The phrase 'Cannot delete the last remaining tab' further defines scope.

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 the tool is for deleting individual tabs, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like delete_sheet. It provides a negative constraint ('Cannot delete the last remaining tab') but no positive guidance on when to use this tool versus others. Thus, usage is implied but not fully explicit.

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