get_worksheet_schema

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

No annotations provided; description partially compensates by stating the tool returns field structure, IDs, names, types, and required status. However, it does not mention authorization requirements, rate limits, or confirm the operation is non-destructive.

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?

Single sentence efficiently conveys purpose and output details without extraneous information. No wasted words.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description provides a basic outline of returned data but lacks detail on views and other contextual elements. With 12 sibling tools, more precision would help, especially for differentiating from list_worksheets.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'worksheetId'. The description restates '工作表ID或别名' which is already in the schema, adding no additional context about how to obtain the ID or its format.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves field structure and view information for a worksheet, listing specific elements like IDs, names, types, and required status. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_worksheets, which lists worksheets rather than their 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it is implied as a pre-requisite for record operations, the description does not state usage context or when to avoid it.

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