format_border

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'apply border formatting.' It does not mention effects on existing borders, interaction with other formatting, or any side effects. For a formatting tool, more transparency is expected.

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 sentence, which is concise but somewhat under-informative. It front-loads the action but sacrifices valuable details that could be added without losing conciseness.

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 has 4 optional parameters (including enums and nullability), no annotations, and an output schema that isn't described, the description lacks context about defaults, behavior when color is null, or the effect of not specifying sides. It is incomplete for a formatting tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all parameters, so the description does not need to add much. The description does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema, which already explains style, color, and sides. A score of 3 is appropriate for high coverage with no extra value.

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 action ('Apply') and the resource ('border formatting to a range of cells'), which distinguishes it from sibling formatting tools that operate on other properties (e.g., format_font, format_fill). However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from similar tools or mention that it only affects borders.

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 like format_font or format_alignment. It also lacks any prerequisites or caveats about when not to use it.

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