auto_resize

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

The description discloses the basic behavior (resizing to fit content) and is consistent with the destructiveHint annotation. However, it does not add further context beyond what annotations already provide, such as whether it expands or shrinks cells, or if it modifies the sheet permanently. With annotations already indicating destructiveness, the description provides minimal extra transparency.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus a clear Args list. It front-loads the core purpose and provides parameter details in a structured format without any redundant or verbose content. 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?

Given the tool has an output schema and 5 parameters (2 required), the description covers all parameters with reasonable detail. It does not explain return values deeply, but the output schema exists to handle that. The description is complete enough for a focused auto-resize operation, though it could mention that it modifies existing sheets.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by listing and explaining each parameter in the Args section. It clarifies default values (e.g., dimension defaults to 'COLUMNS', start_index defaults to 0) and provides useful details like 'end_index is exclusive; omit to resize all'. This adds meaning beyond the input schema's property names and types.

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: 'Auto-resize columns or rows to fit content.' It uses a specific verb (auto-resize) and resource (columns/rows), distinguishing it from siblings like 'format_cells' or 'update_cells' which don't handle auto-resizing.

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 the tool should be used when you need to resize columns/rows to fit content, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. The usage context is implied but not explicitly guided.

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