Format several ranges

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

Annotations declare the safety profile (destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), and the description adds a genuinely useful behavioral rule not present in annotations or schema: 'Ranges may repeat; later entries win where they overlap.' It doesn't cover failure/atomicity behavior, so not a 5.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and batching scope, followed by the precedence caveat. Nothing is wasted.

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?

For a batch mutation with no output schema, the description covers scope, option inheritance from format_range, and overlap resolution. It leaves gaps on error/atomicity semantics for a partially-failing batch, but is otherwise sufficient given the rich schema.

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 the nested item properties (bold, borders, number_format, etc.) are already fully documented. The description only adds 'one entry per range' and the overlap precedence rule; baseline 3 is 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 (apply formatting) and resource (several ranges) and clearly frames itself as the multi-range variant of format_range by name. The sibling distinction is explicit: 'same options as format_range, one entry per range.'

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?

The parenthetical '(same options as format_range, one entry per range)' and 'for a whole tab at once' give clear context and imply the single-range alternative, but it never explicitly says when to prefer format_range over this tool.

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