rename_sheet_tab

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full weight. It discloses the return value ("Returns a summary") and the important side effect that ranges referencing the old title must switch to new_title. It doesn't mention permissions or error behavior, but the mutating nature is clear from the verb.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core action in the first sentence and each additional sentence earning its place by clarifying parameters or side effects. There is no filler.

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 three-parameter rename tool, the description is complete: it explains where inputs come from, how to find the current tab name, the uniqueness requirement, the return type, and the impact on formula references. The output schema covers the exact return shape.

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 0%, but the description defines every parameter: sheet_id as the spreadsheet ID from the URL, tab as the current tab title via list_sheet_tabs, and new_title as the replacement with a collision constraint. This goes far beyond the bare string-only 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 opening sentence states a specific verb and resource: "Rename an existing tab (worksheet)". This clearly differentiates the tool from siblings like add_sheet_tab, delete_sheet_tab, and list_sheet_tabs.

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 gives clear context: use this to rename an existing tab, and it points to list_sheet_tabs to obtain the current tab title. It also sets an explicit constraint that new_title must not collide with another existing tab, though it doesn't explicitly name excluded alternatives.

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