format_layout

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

The description goes beyond annotations by detailing that edits are revisionable (emit native property-change revisions) and notes platform-specific behavior. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description adds valuable context about tracked changes.

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 that front-load the purpose and then add key behavioral context. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool's complexity (6 parameters with nested objects, no output schema), the description lacks detail on how to use parameters (e.g., row_indexes, cell_indexes) and the meaning of 'strict'. It does not cover return values or error conditions.

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 coverage is only 33% (only file_path and google_doc_id have descriptions). The description does not explain the semantics of parameters like 'strict', 'row_height', 'cell_padding', or 'paragraph_spacing' beyond naming the categories. An agent would need more detail to set these correctly.

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 applies layout controls (paragraph spacing, table row height, cell padding). It differentiates from sibling tools like 'clear_formatting' by focusing on specific layout properties.

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 mention of 'Google Docs supports paragraph spacing only' provides some context about when to use which parameter, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'clear_formatting' or 'insert_paragraph'. Usage context is implied but not fully elaborated.

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