list_spreadsheets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose access scoping ('credentials can access') and sort order (most recently modified first), which are genuine behavioral facts. However, it omits pagination behavior, total-count limits, and any rate/scope caveats beyond the credential filter.

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 leading sentence is front-loaded and efficient, and the Args section is a clean, scannable breakdown. Formatting is appropriate for the content; minor redundancy is minimal.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary. For a 2-param, no-annotation list tool, the description is adequate but thin: it lacks notes on pagination, result ordering stability, or empty-result/credential-expiry behavior that would make invocation fully unambiguous.

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% and no enums exist, so the schema alone gives no parameter meaning. The description does cover both params with useful semantics (case-insensitive substring; range 1-100, default visible in schema). But it does not clarify interactions, behavior at limit boundaries, or default handling, leaving gaps given the zero-coverage schema.

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 (List) and resource (Google Sheets) plus scope ('credentials can access') and an ordering rule ('most recently modified first'). This distinguishes it from get_spreadsheet and create_spreadsheet siblings, which operate on a single identified spreadsheet.

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 scope 'credentials can access' and the ordering hint imply when to use this (discovery/browsing), but it does not explicitly name alternatives like get_spreadsheet or state when not to use it. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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