sheets_delete_table

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

The description adds no behavioral details beyond the verb 'delete' and the idempotentHint annotation. It does not mention that deletion is permanent, whether write permissions are required, what happens to associated data, or potential errors. For a destructive operation, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 with no filler. It states the essential action and method, earning full marks for efficiency.

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 destructive delete tool with no output schema, the description omits important context: return behavior, error conditions, permission requirements, and irreversibility. The single sentence is too minimal to fully equip an agent, especially given the annotation only covers idempotency.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description essentially restates 'by tableId', adding no new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema's completeness.

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 'Delete a native Google Sheets table by tableId' clearly states the action (delete), the resource (native Google Sheets table), and the identifying method (by tableId). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sheets_delete_sheet and sheets_delete_chart, which target different resources.

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 clearly implies this tool is for deleting tables (not sheets or charts) and specifies the identifying parameter. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the resource type is unambiguous, and the context makes it clear when to use it.

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