clear_range

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

No annotations are provided. The description only says 'Clear values', but it does not disclose whether formatting, formulas, or data validation are preserved. It also does not mention authorization needs or whether the operation is reversible. For a potentially destructive action, this is insufficient.

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 only 8 words in a single sentence, which is concise. The verb 'Clear' is front-loaded. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices necessary detail; therefore it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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 a simple purpose and an output schema exists, so return values are likely documented elsewhere. However, for a destructive operation, details about side effects (e.g., formatting preservation) and required permissions are missing. An agent may need to rely on external knowledge, making completeness only adequate.

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%, so parameters 'range' and 'spreadsheet_id' have no documentation. The description adds minimal value: it qualifies 'range' as a 'bounded, sheet-qualified A1 range', but does not explain spreadsheet_id or provide formatting constraints. The agent must infer parameter meaning from the name alone.

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 clearly states the verb ('clear') and the resource ('values from ... range'). It specifies 'one bounded, sheet-qualified A1 range', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_range, sort_range, or freeze_panes. No ambiguity about what action is performed.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as write_range (to overwrite values) or delete_sheet. No mention of prerequisites, limitations, or typical use cases. An agent has no context for decision-making beyond the tool name.

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