sheets_find

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

The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation, as 'Finds' implies a read operation. However, it adds little behavioral context beyond the annotation, such as return format, pagination behavior, or permission requirements. No contradictions exist.

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 short, front-loaded sentence with no redundant information.

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 should clarify what the tool returns (e.g., list of spreadsheet IDs/names) and pagination behavior. It covers the core function but leaves these details implicit, which is acceptable for a simple read tool but not fully complete.

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%, providing descriptions for query, pageSize, and pageToken. The description adds the nuance that the query is a spreadsheet name, but does not explain pagination semantics beyond the schema.

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 the specific verb 'Finds' and identifies the resource as 'Google Sheets spreadsheets' with the scope 'by name.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like drive_search (broader search) and sheets_getMetadata (metadata for a known spreadsheet).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like drive_search, drive_findFolder, or slides_find. It lacks explicit context, exclusions, or alternative tool referrals.

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