list_sheets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral transparency. It fails to disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or any side effects. The one-phrase description offers no insight beyond the basic action.

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, consisting of a single phrase. While it avoids verbosity, it lacks structure and depth. It is not overly long but could benefit from a sentence or two to improve clarity without adding significant length.

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 tool has 2 optional parameters and no output schema. The description does not mention the return format, pagination behavior, or any additional context like whether the list is limited or ordered. Given the lack of output schema, more description is needed to make the tool fully usable.

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 input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (limit with default, folder for filtering). Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so no uplift.

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 'シート一覧取得' clearly translates to 'get list of sheets', specifying the action (retrieve) and resource (sheet list). It is concise and understandable, though it does not differentiate from the sibling 'search_sheets' which may have similar functionality.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_sheets' or 'get_sheet_content'. There is no mention of prerequisites or intended scenarios.

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