resolve_spreadsheet_comment

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not explain what 'resolve' entails (e.g., marking a comment as resolved, closing a thread), whether the action is reversible, or any permission requirements. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that wastes no words. It directly communicates the tool's purpose, which is ideal for conciseness, even though additional context is missing.

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 tool has 3 parameters and no annotations, yet the description is minimal. While an output schema exists, the description still fails to provide necessary behavioral context, such as what resolving a comment does or when to use it, making it incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 the description adds no parameter-level detail. While parameter names (user_google_email, spreadsheet_id, comment_id) are somewhat self-explanatory, the description does not clarify their exact roles or any constraints, such as ownership or authentication implications for user_google_email.

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 verb 'Resolve' and the resource 'a comment in a Google Spreadsheet', distinguishing it from sibling tools like resolve_document_comment or resolve_presentation_comment by explicitly naming the spreadsheet context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or any alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and resource.

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