list_charts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (JSON list with IDs, titles, positions) but does not mention any behavioral limitations such as whether hidden charts are included or if it operates across all sheets. 'List' implies read-only, but this is not explicit.

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 with clear Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is purposeful and there is no wasted text.

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 list operation, the description covers the primary input and output adequately. It could mention whether charts are listed across all sheets or only one sheet, but given the simplicity, it is mostly complete.

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 has one parameter 'spreadsheet_id' with title 'Spreadsheet Id'. The description says 'The ID of the spreadsheet', which adds almost no new meaning beyond the schema title. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should provide richer compensation, but it does not.

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 specific verb 'List' with a clear resource 'all charts in a spreadsheet', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_chart, delete_chart, and list_sheets. The scope is unambiguous and matches the tool name.

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 when to use this tool (when you need chart IDs, titles, or positions) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. For a simple tool this is acceptable but not proactive guidance.

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