origin_worksheet_info

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the tool does not read worksheet contents and returns descriptive metadata only. It stops short of stating behavior on missing worksheets or confirming the absence of side effects.

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 sentences with no filler; the core purpose is front-loaded and the active-worksheet note is placed second. Every clause 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?

The output schema covers return structure, so the description need not explain it. With only two optional parameters, the active-worksheet behavior is stated, and the metadata scope is explicit, making the definition complete for this simple tool.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions, but the description adds key semantics: omitting both arguments targets the active worksheet. The titles 'Book' and 'Sheet' plus the tool's context make the remaining mapping reasonably clear.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Describe a worksheet' with concrete metadata delivered (size, column names, formats). The qualifier 'without reading it' distinguishes it from the sibling origin_worksheet_read, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

It gives a practical invocation rule: omit both arguments to target the active worksheet. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, but the 'without reading it' contrast implies the read sibling would be used when cell data is needed.

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