get_formula

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the formula is null when the cell holds a plain value, which is key behavioral information for the agent. However, it does not mention any other traits like idempotency or authorization needs.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and adds a critical behavioral detail about null values.

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 simple read tool with no output schema, the description covers the return value behavior (formula or null). However, it lacks parameter descriptions, which limits completeness. Given the tool's simplicity, it is mostly adequate but could be improved.

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 the description must explain parameters. It does not mention what 'cell' or 'session_id' represent or their expected formats (e.g., cell reference like 'A1'). The agent is left to infer the meaning from the tool name and context.

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 tool reads a formula from a cell ('Read the formula stored in a cell'), which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like read_cell (value) or set_formula (write) by focusing on formula retrieval.

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 usage for retrieving formulas but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like read_cell for values or set_formula for writing. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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