Add spreadsheet tab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the mutation itself. It does not state whether the tab is appended or inserted, what permissions are required, whether the operation is reversible, or how the new tab is identified on return.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized, though it is arguably too terse given the lack of behavioral detail.

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?

The tool is simple (4 params, no nested objects, no output schema) and the schema fully documents inputs, so the description is minimally sufficient. However, with zero annotations, it should do more to explain the mutation's effects and requirements.

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 100% (all four parameters, including the index positioning semantics and account nickname, are documented in the schema). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb ("Add") and resource ("a new tab (sheet)") with the target container ("to a spreadsheet"), so the agent knows exactly what operation is performed. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings such as google_sheets_create (new spreadsheet) or google_sheets_rename_sheet/delete_sheet, so the differentiation is left to the tool name alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives like google_sheets_create or google_sheets_batch_update. Usage is only implied by the verb, which is the bare minimum.

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