apple_numbers_create_table

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

Annotations already declare the write/non-destructive/non-idempotent profile, and the description adds two real behavioral facts: the table is created without header or footer rows, and duplicate table names are rejected. The rejection rule is especially useful because it explains the non-idempotent hint in practice.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core action first and the error behavior second; no filler or redundancy.

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 5-required-parameter mutation with no output schema and thin parameter documentation, the description leaves the agent guessing about prerequisites (open document? existing sheet?) and about what is returned on success. It covers the write semantics and the duplicate-name failure, but not enough of the call context.

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 only 20% (only documentName is documented), so the description should compensate but does not: it never mentions rows, columns, sheetName, or tableName, nor the 1-1000 row and 1-100 column bounds. Only the vague phrase 'named table' hints at tableName.

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?

States a specific verb (add) and resource (named table) scoped to a Numbers sheet, and clarifies the resulting structure has no header or footer rows. It is distinguishable from apple_numbers_create (document) and apple_numbers_list_tables, though it does not explicitly name those siblings.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite (e.g. whether the document must be open first via apple_numbers_open), and no alternative named. The purpose implies the usage but nothing is stated.

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