delete_columns

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the leftward shift behavior and the LibreOffice recompute pass, including a rationale for skipping it. It does not mention irreversibility or side effects on formulas, but the delete operation's permanence is implied and the provided context is substantial.

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 well-structured. The opening sentence states the core action, followed by a targeted optimization note, and a clean bulleted Args list. Every sentence provides value, with no 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 fully covers the tool's behavior, side effects, and all parameters. Since an output schema exists, return values need not be described. The complexity of a destructive column-deletion operation is handled with clear explanation of column shifting and recalculate behavior.

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 compensates fully via the Args section. It explains all 5 parameters: path (file or preloaded name), sheet, start_column (1-based), count, and recalculate. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema fields.

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 tool's action: 'Delete columns', and specifies the effect: 'shifting the columns to their right leftward'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_rows (row removal) and insert_columns (opposite operation).

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 for when to use the tool (to delete columns) and includes a specific usage hint about setting recalculate=False for structurally complex workbooks. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use cases.

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