batch_read

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It states the return format (JSON object mapping ranges to values) and input requirements, but does not mention error behavior, authentication, or explicit read-only nature beyond the word 'read.' This is adequate but incomplete.

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, well-structured into Args and Returns, and the purpose statement is front-loaded. Every sentence provides necessary information with no redundancy.

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 (2 params, no nested objects), and an output schema exists (per context). The description covers purpose, parameters, and return format sufficiently for a read-only batch operation. No additional details are needed for effective use.

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%, so the description must explain parameters. It does so thoroughly: 'spreadsheet_id' is identified, and 'ranges' is explained with a concrete example ('Sheet1!A1:B5,Sheet1!D1:E5'). This fully compensates for the empty schema.

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 states a clear, specific action: 'Read values from multiple ranges at once.' It uses a verb ('read') and a resource ('values from multiple ranges'), and the phrase 'at once' distinguishes it from single-range reads like read_cells and from batch_write.

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 implies usage for reading multiple ranges but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives (e.g., read_cells for single ranges) or provide exclusions. No guidance on when not to use it is given.

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