list_sheets

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic action. It does not mention the return format, whether the operation is read-only, or any side effects or error conditions; an agent gets only the singular purpose, not the behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It is short, readable, and does not waste space repeating the tool name or title.

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 lack of an output schema and no annotations, the description must explain at least the response format, but it does not describe anything about the returned data (e.g., a list of sheet names/titles). This is a significant gap for an agent integrator, since the tool's behavior is minimal for real 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% and the description adds no meaning for spreadsheet_id. It merely restates that the spreadsheet is specific, without explaining the ID's format, origin, or how it is used in the operation.

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 purpose: it lists all sheets in a specific Google Spreadsheet. The verb 'lists', resource 'sheets', and scope 'specific Google Spreadsheet' are explicit, and the tool is clearly distinct from the cell-level sibling tools read_cells and write_cells.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites are mentioned (e.g., how to obtain the spreadsheet_id), and there is no suggestion of a workflow such as listing sheets before reading cells. Usage is implied only by the tool's name.

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