workiva_read_cells

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses return format (TSV), default behaviors for rows/columns, and the meaning of -1 for end_row. However, it doesn't define MAX_CELL_ROWS or describe error handling, which is a gap but not critical for a simple read operation.

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 concise and well-structured with a clear lead sentence followed by a parameter list. It avoids redundancy, every sentence adds value, and the information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, one required) and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the core behavior and parameter semantics, but omits details about MAX_CELL_ROWS and potential errors, which slightly reduces completeness.

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%, so the description fully compensates. It explains each parameter's meaning and default behavior (e.g., end_row -1 means up to MAX_CELL_ROWS, start_col default 0), which goes well beyond the schema's basic type/default definitions.

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 'Read cell values from a spreadsheet table' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by emphasizing 'cell values' and 'TSV format', making it distinct from row/column retrieval tools like workiva_get_table_rows.

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?

Provides clear context that this tool reads cell values from a spreadsheet table and references how to obtain the table_id (from workiva_spreadsheet_sheets). It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to select it for cell-level reads.

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