read_range

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

Clearly describes the return format ({"range", "values"}) and the value_render_option enum, adding behavioral detail beyond the schema. No side effects or auth info needed for a read.

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?

Extremely concise: three lines cover purpose, parameter detail, and return format. No filler; 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?

Covers most relevant aspects for a simple read tool: range format, value render options, and output structure. Missing explanation for spreadsheet_id, but overall complete given no output schema.

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?

Adds meaning for 'range' with an example and explains 'value_render_option' options, but does not clarify 'spreadsheet_id' (ID vs URL, required context). With 0% schema coverage, more parameter help expected.

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 action ('Read cell values') and the resource ('from an A1 range'), with an example format that distinguishes this read tool from sibling write/clear tools.

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?

Implied usage for reading cell values, but no explicit guidance on when to use this versus sibling tools like batch_read, or when not to use it.

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