sheets_list_tabs

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral burden. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, require special permissions, or whether it includes hidden tabs. It provides basic behavioral context but lacks depth.

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, precise sentence that front-loads the action. It contains no fluff or redundant information, making it highly efficient.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the core functionality. However, it could be slightly more complete by mentioning its role as a discovery tool relative to siblings and explicitly noting its read-only nature. Still, it is sufficient for a basic list operation.

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 only parameter (spreadsheet_id) has no description in the schema (0% coverage). The description's phrase 'for a spreadsheet' adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name and does not explain what an ID is or how to obtain it. This does not adequately compensate for the missing schema description.

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 action (List) and the specific resource (tab/sheet names and dimensions). It naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools sheets_read and sheets_write by focusing on tab metadata rather than cell 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?

No explicit guidance is given for when to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose implies it's a discovery step before reading/writing, but this is not stated. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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