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 return format (JSON with ID, title, index) and explains the index default, but it does not explicitly mention side effects (e.g., that it modifies the spreadsheet) or any permissions/error behavior. Since 'create' implies a write operation, the omission of explicit mutation is notable but not severely misleading.

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: a one-line summary, a clear 'Args' section with each parameter, and a 'Returns' section. Every sentence earns its place; there is no filler 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?

For a simple create operation with 3 parameters, the description covers the essential elements: what the tool does, the arguments, and the return value. It doesn't mention error cases (e.g., duplicate title) or permissions, but given the simplicity and the fact that the return value is described, it is largely complete. The lack of annotations slightly reduces transparency, but not enough to penalize heavily.

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 must compensate. It does so thoroughly: spreadsheet_id is defined as 'The ID of the spreadsheet,' title as 'Name for the new sheet,' and index as 'Position for the new sheet (-1 for end),' which also explains the default behavior. This adds clear meaning beyond the bare 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 starts with 'Create a new sheet/tab in a spreadsheet,' which uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_spreadsheet (creates a whole spreadsheet) and duplicate_sheet (copies an existing sheet). The rest of the description reinforces this purpose.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. The usage is implied (you need an existing spreadsheet), but there is no direct guidance about when to prefer create_sheet over, say, create_spreadsheet or rename_sheet.

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