manage_sheets

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

Annotations set destructiveHint: true, and the description includes actions like delete, which implies destructive behavior. The description does not elaborate on side effects, permissions, or reversibility beyond what annotations provide, but it does not contradict them either.

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 structured with a brief overview followed by a bullet list of parameters. While somewhat lengthy, every sentence serves a purpose and the format is clear. Minor redundancy (e.g., actions listed twice) could be trimmed.

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 all parameters and their roles but does not explain return values or behavior for each action (e.g., what 'list' returns). Given no output schema, this gap reduces completeness for an agent invoking the tool.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully explains each parameter: action lists valid options, workbook defaults to active, sheet is required for specific actions, new_name for rename/add/copy, position and count for insert/delete. This adds essential meaning missing from the schema.

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 states 'Manage sheets and structure' and lists specific actions via the action parameter. While it clearly indicates the tool's purpose for sheet-level operations, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like manage_workbooks, but the action list implicitly covers that.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., manage_workbooks for workbook operations, write_data for data changes). The description does not include any when-to-use or when-not-to-use information.

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