Write to spreadsheet

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: it overwrites existing data in place. However, with no annotations provided, it does not cover other relevant behaviors like authentication requirements, whether the sheet must already exist, limits on data size, or the exact shape of the written block. The overwrite disclosure is helpful but not comprehensive.

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, direct sentence that leads with the action and key resource. The parenthetical efficiently conveys the critical overwrite behavior without unnecessary words. It is perfectly sized for the information offered.

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?

For a write tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is somewhat thin. It correctly states the operation and the overwrite caveat but does not explain how the dimensions of the values array map to the target range, nor does it suggest any expected return value. Given that the schema explains individual parameters, this is acceptable but not thorough.

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%, so the description adds only minimal additional meaning. It restates that the range is the top-left starting point (matching the schema) and ties range to values by saying 'rows of values starting at that cell.' This is slight enhancement, but the schema already documents each parameter accurately.

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 writes rows of values to a spreadsheet starting at a specified top-left cell. The parenthetical 'overwrites in place' distinguishes it from related operations like google_sheets_append, making its specific function 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 provides context ('starting at a range top-left cell' and 'overwrites in place') that implies it is for replacing a block of cells, but it does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool or provide alternatives such as google_sheets_append. The overwrite hint offers some guidance, but there are no explicit when-to-use versus when-not-to-use directions.

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