delete_rows

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions delete action and success message but fails to note that deletions are permanent, rows shift, or any side effects such as affecting formulas. The 0-based indexing is clarified, but the irreversible nature and potential cascading effects are not disclosed.

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 a model of conciseness. The purpose leads in one sentence, then a structured Args block with clear labels, and a Returns line. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 description covers the parameters and return value, which is adequate for a straightforward deletion tool. However, given the lack of annotations and usage guidance, the absence of behavioral context (e.g., permanence, index shifting, error handling) leaves the tool incomplete for an agent that needs to anticipate consequences.

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?

Although the input schema has no descriptions for its parameters (0% coverage), the tool description compensates well by explicitly defining each parameter: spreadsheet_id, sheet_id, start_index (0-based), and num_rows. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare property names.

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 'Delete rows from a sheet', which is a specific verb+resource. It completely distinguishes this tool from siblings like insert_rows, append_rows, and clear_cells by naming the exact operation and target.

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 deleting rows but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. It gives parameter instructions but no context about prerequisites or situations where a different tool would be more appropriate.

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