List the tabs in a Google Sheet

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint and openWorldHint, so safety is declared structurally. The description adds cost information ('free') and enumerates the response fields, which the annotations do not. It does not restate pagination or failure behavior, keeping it short of a 5.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the return payload before the routing advice. Efficient, though the four-tool callout plus the deletion clause makes the second sentence dense.

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, the description compensates by naming the returned fields, and the usage routing is thorough. The remaining gap is that it never says which identifier parameter to prefer, leaving an agent to infer sheetUrl vs spreadsheetId.

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 100%, so both parameters (sheetUrl, spreadsheetId) are already documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about them, notably no guidance on which of the two alternatives to supply when neither is required — baseline 3.

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+resource ('The tabs in a Google Spreadsheet') and enumerates the returned fields (name, sheetId, row/column count, position). An agent can distinguish this from read_sheet (content) and manage_sheet_tabs (mutation) without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly names the prerequisite condition and four sibling tools it must precede (update_sheet, clear_sheet_range, manage_sheet_tabs, format_sheet), plus the deletion-proposal case. It also gives the reason — learn what the file contains instead of guessing a tab name.

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