set_borders

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

Despite no annotations, the description explains how to set borders using style and edge parameters, and that NONE clears borders. It does not mention permissions, rate limits, or full side effects (e.g., whether existing borders are fully replaced), but covers core behavior well.

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 only three sentences that front-load the purpose immediately. Every sentence adds useful detail without redundancy.

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 10 parameters and no output schema, the description covers essential functionality but lacks detail on parameters like color and the exact result format. It is adequate for simple use but leaves gaps for advanced scenarios.

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 description coverage, the description adds value by explaining style enum, outer edges, and inner borders. However, it omits spreadsheet_id, range, color, and the specific effect of setting boolean flags for top/bottom/left/right.

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 sets borders on an A1 range, specifying the resource (range) and action (set borders). It distinguishes from siblings like format_cells or set_chart_border by focusing exclusively on borders.

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 clear context about style and edge parameters but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., format_cells) or mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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