sheets_move_dimension

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not explain index semantics (e.g., zero-based indexing, inclusive/exclusive range, how destination_index interacts with the moved block) or potential side effects like shifting of adjacent rows/columns.

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 sentence with no redundancy, efficiently conveying the core 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?

Given the complexity of a move operation (6 required parameters, no annotations, no schema descriptions), the description is insufficiently detailed to allow correct invocation without additional assumptions. Critical information such as index base, edge-case behavior, and return value is missing.

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 input schema has no descriptions and the tool description provides minimal semantic support. 'Contiguous block' maps to start/end indices, but the exact meaning of destination_index (e.g., position relative to the block) is ambiguous; spreadsheet_id and sheet_id are only inferable from their 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 identifies the action (move), the resource (rows or columns/dimension), and the scope (contiguous block to a new position). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sheets_insert_dimension and sheets_delete_dimension by specifying movement rather than insertion or deletion.

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, such as insert/delete or sort. The description does not mention prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent without clear decision criteria.

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