sheets_batch_update_values

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety profile is known. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as how existing values in the ranges are affected or how valueInputOption influences interpretation. It neither contradicts annotations nor enriches them.

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 single, concise sentence that front-loads the core action and scope. Every word is purposeful, with no redundant details 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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (batch operation with nested data) and the presence of a detailed schema, the description is sufficient to understand the tool's basic function. It lacks explicit mention of overwriting behavior or response format, but these are not critical given the schema and annotations. Slight improvement could clarify how values are applied to the ranges.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters (spreadsheetId, data, valueInputOption). The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already documents, maintaining the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('update') and resource ('values in multiple ranges of a Google Sheets spreadsheet'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like sheets_update_values by explicitly mentioning 'multiple ranges', making its scope unambiguous.

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 conveys a clear context (batch update of multiple ranges) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusion criteria or specific scenarios. The guidance is implied by the wording and not spelled out.

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