delete_rows

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

Since annotations are absent, the description carries the burden. It discloses that rows below the deletion shift upward and explains the recalculate behavior (a LibreOffice recompute pass after saving). This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the tool name and schema.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line summary, a practical tip about recalculate, and a clean bullet-style Args list. Every sentence provides useful information 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?

With an output schema present, omitting return-value details is appropriate. The description covers all parameters, explains the row-shifting consequence, and includes a note about file saving and LibreOffice recalc, making it complete for this moderately complex tool.

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 includes an Args section that explains all five parameters (path, sheet, start_row, count, recalculate) in plain language. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptive text.

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 deletes rows and explicitly notes that rows below shift upward. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_columns and delete_sheet, which operate on different elements.

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?

It gives concrete guidance on when to set recalculate=False (structurally complex workbooks that shouldn't be round-tripped through LibreOffice). It doesn't explicitly contrast with alternative deletion tools, but the operation is self-explanatory and the sibling set is broad enough that no such guidance is essential.

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