configure_subtotals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Configure' implies mutation, but nothing says whether existing subtotals are replaced or merged, whether the label/aggregation defaults are applied on every call, or what permissions are needed.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. It is terse to the point of being under-specified, but not padded or repetitive.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but for a five-parameter mutation tool with zero annotation coverage and zero schema descriptions, the definition is far too thin. It leaves the agent guessing about field selection, aggregation behavior, and side effects.

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 0% across five parameters, and the description only obliquely gestures at labels and per-dimension subtotals. It gives no meaning for worksheet_name, measure_fields, subtotal_fields, aggregation, or the default 'Avg.' label, so it does not compensate for the schema gap.

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 (configure) and resource (subtotals), plus the sub-resource of per-dimension subtotal labels. An agent can tell this is the worksheet subtotals tool; it just doesn't need to name a sibling because no other tool covers subtotals.

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?

No indication of when to use this versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., worksheet must exist or be opened first), and no mention of what state the worksheet must be in. The agent is left to infer everything from the name.

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