sheets_unmerge_cells

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

Annotations include idempotentHint: true, which is already provided. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., what happens to data in merged cells, whether partial overlaps are handled, or any side effects). With the annotation, the bar is lowered, but the description still provides little beyond the obvious. Score 2.

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 short sentence with no fluff. It is perfectly concise. Score 5.

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?

With no output schema, no parameter descriptions, and only an idempotent hint, the description provides minimal context. It doesn't explain behavior on partial merges, what happens if the range contains no merged cells, or whether it operates on all merges overlapping the range. For a simple tool it might suffice, but given the lack of schema docscasions, it's incomplete. Score 1.

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 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention spreadsheetId or range at all. It doesn't explain what the range means (must it cover the entire merged region? partial ranges allowed?), nor does it add any guidance. Since coverage is 0%, the description must compensate but fails. Score 1.

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 'Unmerge cells in a Google Sheet' clearly states the verb (unmerge) and resource (cells in a Google Sheet). It is specific enough to distinguish from siblings like sheets_merge_cells. However, it lacks any detail about scope or edge cases, so it doesn't fully differentiate from potential similar operations. Score 4.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool, what the range should represent, or any prerequisites (e.g., whether the range must exactly match a merged range). It doesn't mention alternatives or contrast with related tools. Score 2.

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