list_sheet_rows

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

The description explicitly discloses that the tool is read-only and returns columns and rows with stable rowIndex identity. Since no annotations are present, this carries the behavioral transparency burden and does so reasonably well, though error behavior and edge cases are not covered.

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 and free of unnecessary detail. Two sentences convey the core action, read-only nature, and return shape 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?

The description provides enough context for a basic invocation: what it lists and what it returns. However, it omits parameter semantics and details about filtering/pagination behavior, leaving some ambiguity for more advanced use.

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 schema provides no descriptions for parameters and the description does not compensate. excel_path and sheet_name are somewhat self-explanatory, but q is ambiguous and limit lacks contextual explanation, so parameter semantics are effectively undocumented.

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 a specific action and resource: 'List rows from any COBie worksheet.' It also mentions the read-only nature and stable identity via rowIndex, which distinguishes it from specialized sibling tools like list_components or list_floors.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'any COBie worksheet' implies generic raw row access, but no sibling tools, exclusions, or edge-case usage are mentioned.

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