Import rows (CSV)

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent mutation. The description adds important behavior beyond that: rows are appended, output values land as manual cells, up to 1,000 rows complete synchronously, larger imports run in the background, and duplicate index values are skipped. These are exactly the operational details an agent needs.

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 dense and front-loaded around the append/CSV behavior. It repeats the title at the start and is somewhat run-on with status jargon, but every sentence carries useful information.

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?

For a two-parameter import tool with no output schema, the description covers the key async threshold, status values, duplicate handling, and cell landing behavior. It lacks error handling and permission details, but it is otherwise complete enough to invoke correctly.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real meaning about the csv parameter: the first row contains input and/or output column names, and output values become manual cells. It does not add much about the id parameter, but the CSV semantics go beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: append rows from CSV text to a dataset. It clearly distinguishes this as a CSV import operation, but it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools like add_dataset_rows or build_dataset_rows.

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?

Usage is implied by the CSV-specific wording and the append semantics, but the description never says when to prefer this tool over add_dataset_rows or build_dataset_rows. It also gives no prerequisites or exclusions.

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