Criar planilha (XLSX/CSV)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait of requiring approval ('Sujeito a aprovação') and implicitly indicates a write operation. However, it does not mention overwrite behavior, return values, or error conditions, which are useful but secondary for a creation 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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place, and the approval condition is included without excess.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters with 2 required and no output schema. The description covers the essential action and approval but does not explain the confirm_token parameter (likely tied to approval) or the sheet parameter (default 'Sheet1'). An agent may not know how to supply the confirmation token correctly.

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 coverage is 50% (path and rows have descriptions). The description adds meaning to path (format determined by extension) and rows (array of arrays), but does not explain sheet or confirm_token. It partially compensates for the coverage gap but leaves two parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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 states a specific action (creates) and resource (a .xlsx or .csv spreadsheet) determined by the extension. It clearly distinguishes from generic write_file and other format-specific writers like write_docx/write_pdf.

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 implies the tool is for spreadsheet formats but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives such as write_file. The 'Subject to approval' note is a condition, not usage direction. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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