add_totals_row

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the row is bold and defaults to sum, and allows override. However, it does not mention edge cases like invalid table_range or what happens if headers are missing, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Two sentences: first states primary purpose, second adds crucial detail. Front-loaded and no unnecessary words.

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 output schema and zero schema coverage, the description explains main behavior and 'functions' but omits important context like how to identify the table, assumption about first column, or error handling. Moderate completeness.

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%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'functions' parameter (keyed by header name, with examples) but provides no extra info for 'spreadsheet' or 'table_range' beyond their names. This partially compensates.

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 appends a bold totals row beneath a table, which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like append_rows or update_table. The verb 'append' and resource 'totals row' are precise.

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 explains default behavior (sums all columns except first) and how to override per column via 'functions'. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the usage context is clear from the example.

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