Workbooks Create Workbook Embed

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower. The description usefully adds a capability constraint ('Only public is currently supported') and the source_type/source_id dependency, but says nothing about permissions needed, duplicate-embed behavior, or idempotency.

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?

One summary sentence followed by three one-line parameter glosses, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds information; no filler.

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 no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description adequately covers the non-obvious parameter interactions; it could still mention error behavior or unsupported embed_type values beyond 'public'.

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% and no enums are declared formally, so the description carries the full burden — and it does document 3 of 4 parameters with meaningful semantics, including the conditional requirement linking source_id to source_type. workbook_id is left undocumented, but its meaning is obvious from the tool name.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Create an embed for a workbook'), which is unambiguous even among 120+ siblings. It does not name the sibling it differs from (workbooks_list_workbook_embeds), but the create/list split is self-evident from the verb.

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 by the name and by the conditional note that source_id is required for 'page'/'element' sources. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to an alternative tool for inspecting or removing embeds.

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