add_variables

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only notes that variables are 'empty' (a useful detail). It omits mutation side effects, the role of save/attach, permission needs, and what happens to the running instance.

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?

Two tightly written sentences: the purpose is front-loaded and the type legend follows. Nothing is wasted, though the second sentence could be tied more directly to the 'type' parameter.

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 10-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not clarify the save/attach behaviors or the interaction between count, after, and sheet, leaving substantial gaps an agent would need to fill.

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 high (90%), setting a baseline of 3, and the description adds genuine value by mapping the enum values (0=numeric, 1=text, 2=integer, 3=byte), which the schema only lists numerically without labels.

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?

States a specific verb ('Append') and resource ('new empty variables to a spreadsheet'), which is clearly distinct from siblings like rename_variables, delete_variables, and read_variables. However, it does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from those siblings in the text.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. An agent must infer usage from the name and schema alone.

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