Append Table Rows

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

Annotations already mark the tool as non-read-only and non-idempotent. The description adds that rows are added to the end and the table range automatically extends, which is useful behavioral context beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two succinct sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, no redundant information. Each sentence earns its place by stating what the tool does and a key prerequisite.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering the mutation and side-effect profile, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the core behavior and the necessary preliminary step, without needing to detail return values or error handling for this level of complexity.

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 100%, with all four parameters described. The description only reinforces the relationship between table_id and list_sheet_tables, which is already in the schema, and does not add meaningful extra semantics for parameters like values or spreadsheet_id.

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?

Description clearly states the tool 'Appends rows to a structured table in a Google Sheet', specifying the verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_table_with_data and modify_sheet_values by focusing on appending to existing structured tables, and mentions the automatic extension of the table 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 explicitly advises 'Use list_sheet_tables first to find the table ID', providing a concrete prerequisite. It does not enumerate alternatives or exclusions, but the context within the Sheets toolset makes when-to-use clear enough.

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