update_conditional_formatting

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

No annotations provided, so the description fully discloses behavior: optional parameters preserve existing values, the 'dry_run' parameter shows planned changes without mutation, and the return includes confirmation and state. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with clear Args and Returns sections, but some entries could be slightly more concise, e.g., grouping optional flags. However, it is efficient and front-loaded.

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 11 parameters and an output schema, the description covers all inputs and return behavior thoroughly. It provides enough detail for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without additional context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates excellently by explaining each parameter's purpose, optionality, and default behavior (e.g., 'If omitted, existing ranges are preserved' and 'updates to gradient color scale' for gradient_points).

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 'Updates an existing conditional formatting rule by index on a sheet,' specifying the verb, resource, and methodology. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'add_conditional_formatting' and 'delete_conditional_formatting'.

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 when an existing rule needs modification, but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives. The need for a rule_index is clear, but no guidance on prerequisites or context is given.

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