copy_worksheet

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

The annotation includes destructiveHint:true, but the description does not add any behavioral context beyond the action. It does not disclose what could be destroyed (e.g., an existing target sheet being overwritten) or any side effects. It aligns with the annotation but provides no extra value.

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, 'Copy worksheet within workbook.' It is front-loaded and avoids unnecessary verbosity. However, it is slightly under-specified for a tool with three parameters and a destructive hint.

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, 0% parameter coverage, and a destructiveHint, the description is too sparse. It does not specify what target_sheet represents, whether the operation overwrites an existing sheet, what happens to formatting or data, or what success/error responses look like.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the meanings of filepath, source_sheet, or target_sheet. While the parameter names are self-explanatory, the description adds no semantic detail about how these parameters interact or what values are expected.

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 uses a specific verb 'copy' and clearly identifies the resource as a 'worksheet' within a 'workbook', distinguishing it from sibling tools like copy_range (which copies ranges) and delete_worksheet/rename_worksheet. The phrase 'within workbook' also clarifies the scope, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 versus alternatives such as copy_range or create_worksheet. It does not mention prerequisites, whether the target sheet must not exist, or any context where this tool is preferred over others.

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