Batch Update Spreadsheet

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false and destructive=true. The description adds a list of destructive operations (e.g., deleteSheet, mergeCells) but does not explicitly warn about permanence or side effects. While it provides some context beyond annotations, it stops short of fully disclosing behavioral implications.

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 well-organized with clear sections: summary, args, request types, returns, and examples. While the Args section paraphrases schema descriptions, the added request types and examples are valuable. It is appropriately detailed for the tool's complexity, though slightly long.

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 description covers purpose, parameters, common operations, return shape, and includes examples. It defers to external API documentation for full request schema, which is reasonable given the open-world nature. It is complete enough for an agent to understand and invoke the tool, though it lacks explicit error-handling or permission guidance.

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 schema for 'requests' is an open object with no structure, and the description compensates by listing valid request types (updateCells, addSheet, deleteSheet, etc.) and providing concrete examples (addSheet, repeatCell). This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema, especially for the request construction.

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 opens with a clear verb ('Apply batch updates') and specifies the resource (Google Spreadsheet), then enumerates the range of operations (formatting, charts, filters, conditional formatting). This distinguishes it from siblings like sheets_update_values and sheets_append_values, which focus on simple value updates.

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 lists common request types that imply usage for structural/complex changes, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over simpler alternatives like sheets_update_values or sheets_append_values. It lacks clear exclusionary guidance or named alternatives.

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