List WorkPaper Sheets

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds contextual behavior by stating 'Returns metadata only', which aligns with annotations. It provides additional value by explaining the tool's role in workflows, but does not contradict annotations.

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 concise with only two sentences. It front-loads the purpose immediately and ends with clear alternatives. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given no parameters, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It effectively communicates the tool's role and when to use siblings. Could be slightly more explicit about 'used dimensions' meaning, but with output schema, it's sufficient.

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 tool has no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. With no parameters to describe, the description cannot add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Discover sheet names and used dimensions before reading or editing a WorkPaper.' It uses a specific verb ('Discover') and resource ('sheet names and used dimensions'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly directing users to use 'read_range or read_cell for values'.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool ('before reading or editing a WorkPaper') and what not to use it for ('use read_range or read_cell for values'). It names alternative sibling tools, providing clear guidance on tool selection.

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