sheets_merge_cells

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that indices are 0-based and end is exclusive, but omits critical side effects like the fact that merging typically keeps only the top-left value, potentially discarding other data. No authentication or error behavior is discussed.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and adds a key detail about index semantics, making it appropriately sized for a straightforward operation.

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 mutation tool with 7 parameters and no annotations, the description is too thin. It leaves out essential behavioral context about merge outcomes, data preservation, and prerequisites. The output schema exists, but that does not compensate for the missing operational details.

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 compensate. The indexing note partially clarifies start_row, end_row, start_col, and end_col, but merge_type is entirely unexplained, and the parameter semantics are otherwise left to inference from the schema names alone.

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 'Merge cells in a sheet' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from related operations like sheets_unmerge_cells. It also adds useful indexing details that clarify the exact operation scope.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sheets_unmerge_cells or sheets_batch_update. The only implied usage is from the operation name itself, with no explicit exclusions or prerequisites.

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