map_create_sheet

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral traits: creating an empty sheet, switching to it, and returning the new sheet id. It doesn't address permissions or error conditions, but for a simple creation tool, this is sufficient and adds value beyond the schema.

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 concise sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action, followed by the return value. No filler or redundancy, earning a high score.

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 has only one optional parameter, no output schema, and no annotations. The description covers the action, the switching side effect, and the return value, making it fully sufficient for an agent to invoke and interpret the result.

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 only parameter 'name' has a full description in the schema (100% coverage), so the description doesn't need to add parameter details. Baseline 3 applies; the schema does the heavy lifting, and the description provides no extra semantic value.

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 the verb (create), the resource (new empty sheet), and the side effect (switch to it), plus the return value (new sheet id). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like map_switch_sheet and map_rename_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 clear context: it creates a new sheet and switches to it, implying it should be used when a new sheet is needed and immediate work on it is desired. Though it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, the context is clear enough for agent selection.

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