Delete rows or columns

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety class is known. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond that: 'Not undoable' tells the agent the operation is irreversible, which the annotations do not express. It stops short of describing downstream effects such as shifted references or formulas breaking.

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 zero filler; the destructive constraint is front-loaded alongside the operation and the irreversibility warning closes it. Every clause carries information.

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?

With annotations covering safety and a fully described schema, the definition supplies what an agent needs to call it: accepted range formats and the irreversibility caveat. It is only slightly short on what happens to surrounding data (cell shifting, reference breakage) and how to recover.

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%, so all three parameters (range, spreadsheet, account) are already documented in the schema, including the same range examples. The description repeats the example formats but adds no syntax or constraint the schema lacks, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 ('Delete entire rows ... or columns') and immediately disambiguates from the sibling insert_rows_or_columns by naming the delete direction. The inline range examples make the target object unambiguous without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is only implied: the description never says when to prefer this over clear_range (which empties cells without shifting) or insert_rows_or_columns, nor does it mention undo_last as the recovery path. The range examples give the shape of a valid call but not the selection criteria between alternatives.

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