rename_sheet

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

The description includes a critical behavioral note that formulas referencing the old name are not rewritten. However, with no annotations, it should additionally cover other behavioral aspects like required permissions or impact on sheet references, which are missing.

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 extremely concise—two sentences with no redundant information. Every word serves a purpose, making it easy to parse.

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 operation like renaming a sheet, the description covers the core action and a key side-effect. However, it lacks context about return values, error conditions, or prerequisites (e.g., sheet must exist), and no output schema is provided.

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?

The parameter names are self-explanatory (name, new_name, session_id), but the description adds no extra meaning. For example, it does not clarify that session_id identifies the workbook session or specify constraints on new_name (e.g., uniqueness, allowed characters).

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 'Rename' and the resource 'a sheet', making the action unambiguous. It is distinct from sibling tools like copy_sheet or delete_sheet.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'Use this to rename an existing sheet; if you need to duplicate a sheet, use copy_sheet'). The description lacks contextual cues for optimal selection.

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