sheets_search

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

There are no annotations and the description does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or non-destructive. It also does not disclose what fields are returned, whether results match partial/fuzzy criteria, or how errors/no-results are handled.

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 content. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simple purpose.

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 that there is no output schema and no usage guidance, the description is incomplete for a new agent. It lacks information about the returned object shape, how to interpret results, search scope (e.g., Drive-wide vs. a specific location), and how the results connect to other tools that require spreadsheet IDs.

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 100% with basic descriptions for 'query' and 'maxResults'. The description adds minimal extra meaning by clarifying that search is by name or content, but parameter descriptions remain shallow and do not explain query format or result limits beyond defaults.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Search'), a specific resource ('Google Sheets'), and the scope ('by name or content'). It is immediately clear what the tool does and it stands apart from the many mutation/retrieval sibling tools.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as using it to discover spreadsheet IDs before calling sheets_get_data or sheets_update_data. The description implies a search/discovery role but never states it explicitly.

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