origin_sort_worksheet

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. 'Pandas round trip' hints at data type conversion and performance implications but fails to mention that the worksheet is modified in-place, or what happens to unsortable data. Lacks details on required permissions or side effects.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded with the core action. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity; every word has purpose but the information is insufficient.

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 4 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and an output schema (which presumably documents return values), the description is incomplete. It does not cover parameter constraints, behavior on invalid input, or the effect on the worksheet. While the output schema may fill some gaps, the description itself lacks completeness.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It mentions 'by a column' corresponding to the 'by' parameter but does not explain that it can be a column name or index, nor does it describe 'ascending', 'book_name', or 'sheet_name'. Most parameters are left unexplained.

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?

Description clearly states the action (sort) and resource (worksheet rows by a column). The phrase 'through a pandas round trip' adds specificity. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'origin_clear_worksheet' or 'origin_delete_columns', but the sorting intent is distinct enough.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., 'use this to sort data before plotting'). No mention of prerequisites such as the worksheet existing or the column being selected. The description is purely functional without context.

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