sheets_append

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the key behavior of appending after existing data, but omits details such as how 'range' affects the append location or any side effects, making it minimally transparent.

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 sentence of eight words, front-loading the core action and placement. Every word is purposeful, with no unnecessary detail.

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 tool with three required parameters and no annotations, the description is too terse. It does not explain the role of 'range' in an append operation or how 'values' should be structured, though the output schema exists.

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% and the description does not mention any of the three parameters (spreadsheet_id, range, values). It adds no meaning about their purpose or structure, leaving an agent without guidance.

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 states the specific action ('Append rows') and resource ('Google Sheet'), and clarifies placement ('after existing data'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like sheets_write, which implies writing to a specific range.

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 use for adding rows to the end of existing data, giving clear context. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., sheets_write) or state 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.