delete_sheet_rows

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

The annotation only provides destructiveHint, but the description does not disclose the dry_run behavior, the irreversibility beyond the hint, or the effect on the remaining rows. It adds little beyond what the parameter names already imply.

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 clear sentence with no wasted words, which is efficient. However, it omits important information that would be necessary for correct use, though that is more a completeness issue than a conciseness one.

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 tool has 5 parameters, destructive behavior, and a safety flag. The description is too brief to guide an agent on proper usage, expectations, or the dry_run safety mechanism. No return value is documented, and the dry_run parameter is a critical omission.

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 descriptions cover 0% of parameters, so the description must compensate. It vaguely addresses 'start_row' and 'count' but leaves filepath, sheet_name, and especially the critical dry_run parameter unexplained.

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 the specific verb 'Delete' with the resource 'rows' and specifies the starting row, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_sheet_columns and delete_range. It clearly communicates the core action.

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, no exclusions, and no mention of the dry_run option for safe preview. It is purely a statement of action without usage context.

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