delete_sheet_tab

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral burden and does so thoroughly: irreversible, no undo through the API, deletes the entire worksheet, and rejects deletion of the last remaining tab. These are exactly the warnings an agent needs before invoking a destructive operation.

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 front-loaded with the core action and irreversibility, then provides constraints, parameter semantics, and return behavior. Every sentence adds operational value with no filler or repetition.

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 destructive two-parameter tool with no annotations, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, irreversible behavior, edge-case constraints, parameter guidance, and the return summary. The output schema covers return details, so nothing critical 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates for both parameters. It explains that sheet_id is the spreadsheet ID from its URL and is required, and that tab is the worksheet title, referencing list_sheet_tabs for lookup. This adds meaning well beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a tab (worksheet) and all of its data.' It also clarifies the destructive scope ('removes the entire worksheet, not just its cells'), making the operation unmistakable among siblings like add_sheet_tab and rename_sheet_tab.

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?

It gives clear context for when to call: when an entire worksheet must be permanently removed, and it warns against calling if contents are needed ('confirm ... contents are expendable'). It also documents a hard exclusion (cannot delete the last tab) and points to list_sheet_tabs for obtaining the correct tab title, though it does not explicitly name an alternative tool for clearing cells or partial deletion.

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