list_sheets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It adds detail about being approximate and covering every sheet, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, hidden sheet inclusion, or ordering. This is adequate but lacks depth.

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 two sentences plus a parameter block, front-loading the main purpose. No filler words; every sentence adds value.

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?

For a simple listing tool with an output schema and one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, parameter, and output content. No crucial gaps; however, it could mention whether hidden sheets are included or if there are prerequisites, but these are minor.

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 has zero description coverage, but the description fully explains the path parameter: path to .xlsx or preloaded file, and when to omit. This adds significant semantic value beyond the schema.

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 lists every sheet in a workbook with approximate row/column counts. The verb 'list' and resource 'sheets' distinguish it from sibling tools like read_sheet or get_workbook_info.

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 does not explicitly compare this tool to alternatives or state when to prefer it. It gives context about omitting the path when only one file is configured, which implies usage conditions but does not address tool selection.

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