optimize_formula_performance

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'optimize' implying modification, but does not state whether formulas are actually changed, if changes are irreversible, or if any permissions are required.

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?

Single sentence, very concise and front-loaded. However, it may be too brief given the complexity of the tool and the lack of annotations.

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?

No output schema and no behavioral context beyond a vague speed improvement claim. For a tool likely modifying spreadsheet state, missing details on side effects, return values, and when to use it.

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% with basic descriptions for all 4 parameters. However, the descriptions are minimal (e.g., 'Level of optimization' for enums 'basic' and 'aggressive' without explaining the difference). Baseline is 3 due to full coverage, but no added value beyond 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?

The description states the tool analyzes and optimizes formula performance with a specific speed improvement of 30-50%. It uses clear verbs and specifies the resource (formula performance). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like analyze_formula_dependencies or detect_formula_errors.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. With over 50 sibling tools, including many formula-related ones (analyze_formula_dependencies, detect_formula_errors), this is a significant omission.

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