sheets_add_banding

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the operation without mentioning that it modifies the spreadsheet, whether it overwrites existing formatting, or how header_color interacts with the banding. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 concise sentence with no redundancy. It earns its place but provides very little beyond the tool's name, making it efficient but not rich.

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 9 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse. It doesn't explain the range specification, color defaults, or return value, leaving the agent without adequate context.

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%, and the description provides no explanation of any of the 9 parameters. It doesn't even clarify that start_row/end_row etc. define the range, or what the color parameters mean.

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 'Apply' and clearly identifies the resource as 'alternating-color row banding' targeting a 'range'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sheets_format_cells or sheets_add_conditional_format, which handle other formatting tasks.

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. It doesn't mention when to prefer it over sheets_format_cells or sheets_add_conditional_format, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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