merge_csv

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

Without annotations, the description fails to disclose key behaviors: it does not mention file preservation, potential overwriting, error conditions, or constraints like the requirement for exactly two files in join mode.

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, but it could benefit from structured formatting to separate modes and clarify usage. It is front-loaded with core purpose, which is good.

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 (10 parameters, 3 required, two modes), the description is incomplete. It does not explain how concatenation works with multiple files, the required keys for join, or the output behavior. The presence of an output schema helps but is not visible here.

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 0%, and the description adds minimal parameter insight. It mentions 'by keys' but does not explain the 'mode' parameter, the 'options' subobject, or the purpose of other parameters like 'column_types' or 'spreadsheet_formula_policy'.

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 two operations: concatenation and joining by keys. It distinguishes the tool's purpose from siblings like 'append_rows' and 'compare_csv'. However, 'matching files' is vague and could be clarified.

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 concatenate vs join, nor does it reference sibling tools for alternative operations like appending rows. No prerequisites or conditions are mentioned.

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