highlight_where

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions applying color/text/bold but does not clarify if it adds a persistent conditional format, overwrites existing formatting, or any side effects. Details on permissions or rate limits are absent.

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, uses two short paragraphs, front-loads the key action, and lists examples efficiently. No redundant text.

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 moderate complexity, the description explains the main functionality but omits return value, persistence of formatting, and effect on existing cell styles. It adequately covers core usage but lacks completeness for nuanced behavior.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds value by explaining 'condition' with examples, noting 'range' accepts A1 or natural refs, and mentioning default color. However, it does not fully describe 'spreadsheet', 'text_color', or 'bold' semantics beyond their names.

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 it 'Conditionally highlight cells from a natural predicate,' specifying the verb and resource. Examples of conditions distinguish it from sibling tools like 'add_conditional_format' or 'format_cells', which use rule-based or direct formatting.

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 implies usage when a natural predicate is available but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_conditional_format' or 'format_cells'. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are stated.

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