read_spreadsheet

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by stating it returns headers and row data, enforces a max_rows cap, and requires the allow_file_read config flag—useful behavioral context beyond the safety hints.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds relevant detail (format, output, options, config requirement). No wasted words, well-structured.

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?

Without an output schema, the description adequately explains the return format (headers and row data). It covers the main options, limits, and prerequisites. Minor gaps remain (error handling, CSV behavior specifics), but for a simple read tool it is sufficiently complete.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a small amount of meaning (e.g., example cell range, default max_rows) but mostly repeats what the schema already documents. It does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond structured fields.

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 clearly states the tool reads rows and cells from spreadsheet files (.xlsx or .csv), distinguishing it from siblings like read_document or read_pdf. It specifies the resource (spreadsheet) and the action (read), making its 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 gives context by specifying supported file types and optional parameters (sheet, cell range), and notes the config requirement. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives like read_file_lines or read_document, though the file type limitation implies the boundary.

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