Create a spreadsheet

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

The description discloses behavior beyond the annotations: the created file's location, the sheet creation behavior with sheet_titles, the default 'Sheet1' fallback, and the returned structure. It also explains a limitation of the Sheets API that affects subsequent operations, which is valuable context not present in the 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 information-dense but well structured: it leads with the core action and return value, then covers file placement and API limitations. Every sentence contributes practical, decision-relevant information without repetition or filler.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description correctly explains the return fields: spreadsheetId, spreadsheetUrl, properties, and sheets[]. It also covers the missing Drive API folder behavior and the lack of a native list endpoint, which are critical for an agent to set correct expectations and handle the returned ID properly.

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%, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds meaningful behavioral semantics beyond that, such as 'sheet_titles creates one tab per title in order' and 'omitted = a single default "Sheet1"', which clarifies how the array parameter affects the result.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Creates a new Google Sheets spreadsheet and returns it...' and enumerates the returned fields. It is immediately distinct from sibling tools like search_spreadsheets or write_values, so an agent can tell what this tool does without ambiguity.

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 gives practical usage context: the file lands in My Drive root, moving it requires the Drive API which is not covered, and the spreadsheetId should be saved because there is no native Sheets list endpoint. It also names search_spreadsheets as the alternative for finding spreadsheets, while noting the Drive scope requirement.

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