sheets_clear

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits, but it only states that values are cleared. It does not mention whether the operation is irreversible, whether formatting or styles are affected, or if specific permissions are required. For a mutating tool, this is a significant gap.

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, focused sentence with no filler or redundant information. It is appropriately concise and immediately readable, making it easy for an agent to parse.

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 but destructive tool with no annotations, the description is under-specified. It does not cover edge cases like whether formatting is preserved, how the range should be formatted, or any side effects. The presence of an output schema does not alleviate the need for basic operational 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?

The schema provides zero description for the two parameters, and the description does not compensate. It mentions 'range' and 'Google Sheet' but does not explain the expected format for the range (e.g., A1 notation) or any additional semantics for spreadsheet_id. The description adds minimal value over the bare property names.

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 a specific verb ('clear') and resource ('a range in a Google Sheet'), explicitly limiting the action to values. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sheets_write or sheets_append, which write or append data, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sheets_write, sheets_append, sheets_merge_cells). The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate. The context is entirely absent.

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