clone_worksheet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects (e.g., whether cloning copies dependencies like calculated fields), authorization requirements, or impact on source worksheet. The description only states what the tool does, not how it behaves.

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 very short (one sentence) and directly states the purpose. It could be considered under-specified, but it is concise and front-loaded with the key action. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity.

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 the tool's complexity (cloning involves copying multiple elements), the description is incomplete. It does not mention what exactly is cloned (e.g., fields, formatting, filters). Although an output schema exists, the description lacks behavioral context needed for correct invocation.

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%, meaning the schema provides no descriptions. The tool description does not add any meaning to the parameters 'source_worksheet' and 'target_worksheet'. It is unclear what format or identifiers are expected (e.g., worksheet names or IDs).

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 'Clone an existing worksheet and its worksheet window', which clearly indicates the action (clone) and the resource (worksheet and its window). It distinguishes from siblings like 'add_worksheet' and 'configure_worksheet_style', though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from them.

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. For example, it doesn't mention when to use 'clone_worksheet' instead of 'add_worksheet' or 'configure_worksheet_style'. There is no context on prerequisites or limitations.

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