clear_cells

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 destructive nature ('Clear all values') and a key side-effect ('keeps formatting'), which is the main behavioral nuance. It does not mention permissions or irreversibility, but that is not needed for a straightforward 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 brief and well-structured: a one-line purpose, followed by a succinct list of arguments and returns. Every sentence contributes necessary information, with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a simple clear operation, the description covers what it does, the parameters, and the return value. Since an output schema is present, the return description is sufficient. It provides all essentials for an agent to choose and invoke the tool correctly.

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 provides zero description coverage, so the description compensates with explicit explanations for both parameters: 'The ID of the spreadsheet' and 'A1 notation range to clear'. These add meaning beyond the bare property names, though they are minimal.

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 a specific verb ('Clear') and resource ('values in a range'), with a critical qualifier ('keeps formatting') that distinguishes it from sibling tools like format_cells or delete_rows. It immediately communicates the core function.

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 phrase 'keeps formatting' provides implicit usage context: use this when you need to clear values while preserving cell formatting. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the behavior described makes the appropriate scenario clear.

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