create_spreadsheet

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses a genuinely non-obvious behavioral trait: spreadsheets created by a service account are owned by that account, which is why share_with matters. It also declares the return values, though it doesn't cover auth scopes or failure behavior.

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?

Purpose and the service-account caveat are front-loaded, followed by a clean Args block for the three parameters. The reflowed multi-line sentence is slightly padded but every sentence carries information.

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 creation tool with no annotations, this covers the purpose, all parameters, the ownership caveat, and the return shape (an output schema also exists, so return details are bonus). Missing pieces are modest: auth/permission requirements and behavior on invalid input.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: each of the three parameters (title, sheet_names, share_with) is explained, including the non-obvious effect of sheet_names replacing the default tab and share_with granting edit access. It adds little on formats or constraints (e.g., email validation) beyond that.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Create a new spreadsheet') and even names the return payload (ID and URL). It is clear what the tool does, but it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling add_sheet, which also creates a tab and could be confused with the sheet_names parameter.

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 one useful conditional ('pass share_with to give a human account access' when the creator is a service account), which implies usage context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use-this vs. when-to-use-add_sheet guidance, and no prerequisites are stated outright.

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