merge_cells

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

The description lacks disclosure of behavioral traits such as whether merging overwrites data, affects formatting, or works only with non-empty cells. Since no annotations are provided, the description should cover these, but it does not.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no filler. The first sentence immediately states the core purpose, and the second elaborates on the key parameter. Every sentence earns its place.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits critical details like what happens to cell content during merge, the return value, and the exact format required for the range parameter. A more comprehensive description is needed for a mutation tool.

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 description adds value by listing the merge_type enum options, which is not present in the schema (0% coverage). However, it provides no additional meaning for range or spreadsheet_id beyond their names. Partial compensation for low schema coverage.

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 'Merge cells in an A1 range,' which specifies the action and resource. The merge_type options are explained, adding clarity. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like unmerge_cells, though the name itself distinguishes.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., format_cells, set_borders) or any prerequisites. The description only explains what the tool does, not when it should be used.

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