aggregate_sheet

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the operation (group/aggregate) but does not explicitly mention that it is read-only, what side effects occur (likely none), or any permission requirements. The arg details add some context but not full behavioral transparency.

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 a single opening sentence followed by a compact, well-organized Args list. Every line adds value, no fluff, and the main purpose is front-loaded.

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 tool's complexity (6 params, nested objects) and the existing output schema, the description covers the operation and all parameters adequately. It could be slightly more complete by explicitly noting the operation's read-only nature and return value, but the output schema covers the return and the description is otherwise thorough.

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 0%, but the description thoroughly explains all six parameters: path, sheet, group_by, agg, cell_range, and has_header. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions, providing clear meaning and examples.

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 'Group and aggregate sheet data with pandas' with a concrete example ('sum sales by region'). This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from siblings like read_sheet or write_cells.

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 implies usage through its name and purpose, and provides parameter-level guidance (e.g., 'Omit if only one file is configured') but does not explicitly explain when to choose this tool over alternatives 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.