insert_columns

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that existing columns shift right and that recalculate triggers a LibreOffice recompute pass that can be skipped. However, it does not mention file save semantics, potential data loss, or error behavior, leaving some ambiguity for a mutation tool.

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 tightly structured: a bold first sentence states the core action, one sentence adds a practical nuance, and the Args block is compact and scannable. Every sentence earns its place 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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no annotations), the description covers all parameters and the key side effect (shifting columns), and an output schema exists to handle return details. It is missing alternatives and file-modification semantics, but remains largely complete for practical 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description includes an Args block that explains all five parameters, including the 1-based indexing of start_column and the purpose of recalculate. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though some parameters (path, sheet) are only minimally explained.

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 opens with 'Insert blank columns, shifting existing columns right,' which is a specific verb+resource+behavior statement that clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like insert_rows and delete_columns.

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 the tool is appropriate (inserting columns) and includes a targeted guideline for setting recalculate=False with a concrete example (structurally complex workbooks). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous.

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