Freeze rows and columns

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

Beyond the annotations (idempotent, destructive), the description adds important behavioral detail: 0 unfreezes, omitting one dimension leaves it unchanged, and freezing all rows/columns is prohibited. These are non-obvious state-change semantics that an agent must know to call the tool correctly. There is no contradiction with 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?

Four short sentences pack distinct information: purpose, unfreeze behavior, partial-update semantics, and the boundary condition. The most identifying information appears first, and every sentence earns its place without repetition.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description plus annotations and full parameter schema cover everything needed to invoke it correctly: the action, typical usage, reversal, partial-update behavior, and the key restriction. No material gap remains.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3 because the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds value by clarifying the hidden constraint that at least one of frozen_rows or frozen_columns is required, and by giving the typical semantic of frozen_rows=1 for pinning a header.

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 and resource: it freezes the first N rows and/or columns of a sheet so they stay visible while scrolling. The concrete example (frozen_rows=1 pins the header) and the distinction between rows and columns make the purpose unambiguous and distinguish it from sibling tools that format cells, manage sheets, or edit data.

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 clearly states the intended use case—keeping rows/columns visible while scrolling—and gives a typical scenario for pinning a header. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but no sibling tool competes for the same freeze action, so the context is sufficiently clear.

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