Search spreadsheets

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses meaningful behavior: results are limited to openable files, trashed files are excluded, ordering is newest-modified first, and the tool uniquely goes through the Drive API. The 403 failure mode without a Drive scope is especially valuable and goes far beyond annotation defaults.

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 dense but each sentence earns its place: scope, returned fields, filtering, pagination, and the critical auth caveat. It front-loads the core purpose before the scope requirement, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields and default ordering. It covers pagination, filtering, exclusions, and authentication failure modes. For a 4-parameter read-only listing tool, nothing essential is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds semantic context on top: name_contains is a substring filter with 'omit to list everything', page_token is tied to nextPageToken, and order_by has a documented default. This enriches the schema rather than repeating it.

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 uses a specific verb ('Finds') and names the exact resource ('Google Sheets spreadsheets the authorized user can open'), including exclusions like trashed files and shared drives. It lists returned fields and default sorting, clearly distinguishing this search/list operation from sibling tools like get_spreadsheet or read_values.

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?

It gives clear operational guidance: omit name_contains to list everything, use page_token for pagination, and handle the Drive-scope requirement. It does not explicitly contrast with get_spreadsheet or other alternatives, but the search/list context is unmistakable and practical.

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