resolve_spreadsheet_comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral traits. It fails to disclose side effects (e.g., changes to comment status), permission requirements, or any irreversible actions. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It front-loads the action but omits essential details. It is not verbose, but it is too minimal to be considered well-structured.

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?

Given the complexity of 3 required parameters with no schema descriptions and an output schema (whose details are unknown), the description is far from complete. It does not explain the return behavior or confirm successful resolution, leaving the agent with insufficient information.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain the meaning or format of any of the three required parameters (user_google_email, spreadsheet_id, comment_id). The agent must rely solely on parameter names, which are insufficient.

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 'Resolve a comment in a Google Spreadsheet,' which conveys the specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like resolve_document_comment and resolve_presentation_comment by specifying the context (spreadsheet). However, it does not elaborate on what 'resolve' entails (e.g., marking as resolved).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as reply_to_spreadsheet_comment or read_spreadsheet_comments. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., comment must exist, user must have permission) or exclusions.

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