share_spreadsheet

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 primary actions and the return value ('JSON with sharing result'), but it does not mention side effects (e.g., modifying ACLs), permission requirements, or error conditions. The relationship between email and make_public is implied but not fully 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 well-structured with an opening summary, an 'Args' bullet list, and a 'Returns' note. Every sentence earns its place—no fluff, and the most important information (purpose) is front-loaded.

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 purpose, all parameters, their conditions, and the return format. With an output schema available (per context signal), return details are complete. It lacks edge-case behavior (e.g., what happens if email is empty and make_public is False) and permission requirements, but for a simple sharing tool it is largely 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter in the 'Args' section, including the allowed values for 'role' and the conditional nature of 'email' (optional if make_public=True). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema definitions.

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 'Share a spreadsheet with someone or make it publicly accessible', which clearly states the verb (share), resource (spreadsheet), and two distinct modes. It is specific and distinguishes this tool from all siblings, none of which handle sharing.

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 provides clear context on the two usage modes (share with email or make public) and explains parameter relationships. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use this tool or mention any alternative, though no sibling tool shares this function, making the usage inherently clear.

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