Workbooks Send Report

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive and open-world, so the external-delivery nature is known. The description adds that the payload must include targets, config and attachments, which is genuinely useful context, but it says nothing about permissions, delivery failure semantics, or whether the send is retryable.

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 short sentences, with the purpose front-loaded before the payload requirements. The line-broken second sentence is slightly awkward but 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the one-off send and payload shape. For a nested, fully undocumented body on an open-world action, however, the definition should say more about valid target formats and permission prerequisites.

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 coverage is 0% and body is an undescribed open object, so the description carries the burden. It meaningfully decomposes body into required parts (targets, config, attachments) and optional ones (parameters, timeout), though it gives no shape or type detail for those fields.

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 with a scope qualifier ('Export (send) a report once to one or more targets'), which implicitly separates it from the scheduled-send and export siblings. It does not name a sibling explicitly, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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 word 'once' hints that this is for one-off delivery versus create_report_schedule or workbooks_send_workbook, but no alternative is named and no when-not condition is given. Usage must be inferred from the surrounding tool list.

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