List Sheet Tables

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope information ('all structured tables') and return contents, but does not disclose potential pagination, rate limits, or authorization nuances. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences with zero waste. The primary behavior and return contents are front-loaded, followed immediately by the practical purpose. Every sentence earns its place.

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 low complexity, two required parameters, full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema, this description is complete. An agent can correctly invoke it and understand why the result matters for append_table_rows.

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 100%, and both parameters are described clearly ('The ID of the spreadsheet', 'The user's Google email address'). The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, which is acceptable since the schema already carries the full burden.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Lists all structured tables in a spreadsheet' with the exact outputs (IDs, names, ranges, column details). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_spreadsheets, read_sheet_values, and get_spreadsheet_info.

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?

Gives explicit context: 'Use this to find table IDs for append_table_rows.' This tells the agent when to call it. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools for reading sheet values, so it stops short of full exclusionary guidance.

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