delete_columns

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well. It discloses merge-aware shrinking/removal behavior, auto-backup with backup=False semantics, atomic validated save, and refusal on Word-open documents. This gives the agent a strong safety and side-effect profile.

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?

Three dense, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Each sentence carries distinct information: deletion target/format, merge behavior, backup/save behavior, and a hard failure condition.

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 deletion semantics, backup, atomicity, and failure conditions, and an output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The only minor gap is cryptic backup wording ('prev/anchor slots in .ks4w-backups'), which is not essential for invoking the tool correctly but could be clearer.

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 description adds meaningful semantics for the columns parameter (0-based list) and clarifies backup behavior, but schema description coverage is 0%. file_path and table_index are left entirely to the schema's bare names and type info, so the description only partially compensates for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 and resource: 'Delete grid columns' with a 0-based list. It also adds key scope details (merge-aware, grid stays consistent) that distinguish it from siblings like delete_rows, insert_columns, and delete_table.

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 usage context is implied by the name and first sentence, and the refusal to operate on documents open in Word is a useful constraint. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention when-not-to-use conditions.

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