workiva_list_sheets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only restates the tool's function and parameter, without disclosing read-only behavior, return format, ordering, pagination, or potential errors. Minimal behavioral insight beyond the literal 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, leading with the main purpose and followed only by a brief parameter explanation. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or repetition.

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 is simple and has an output schema, so return details are unnecessary. However, the description lacks any usage context, such as examples, prerequisites, or how it relates to sibling operations. It is minimally viable but leaves gaps for an agent navigating many similar list tools.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, but the description's Args section clarifies that spreadsheet_id is 'The spreadsheet UUID', adding semantic meaning beyond the schema's simple field name. This compensates for the schema gap.

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 clearly states 'List sheets within a spreadsheet' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_spreadsheets (which lists spreadsheets) and get_sheet (which retrieves a specific sheet).

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and does not mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It simply states what it does without context.

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