List Sheet Tables

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds behavioral detail by specifying what is returned (IDs, names, ranges, column details) and that it lists all structured tables, which goes beyond the annotations. This is helpful context for the agent.

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 total, front-loaded with the main action in the first sentence. Every word adds value: the first specifies the resource and output, the second gives the use case. No waste.

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 that an output schema exists (though not shown), the description appropriately summarizes the return values (IDs, names, etc.) at a high level. It also mentions the downstream use case, and annotations cover safety. This is complete for a simple read-only listing tool.

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 input schema provides full descriptions for both parameters (spreadsheet_id and user_google_email) with 100% coverage. The description does not add further parameter details, but none are needed because the schema is sufficient. Baseline 3 applies.

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 all structured tables in a spreadsheet, specifying the resource (tables) and the action (lists). It also distinguishes from sibling tools by noting it provides table IDs for append_table_rows, which is a sibling tool. This makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 suggests using this tool to find table IDs for append_table_rows, giving a concrete use case. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it for table discovery. It doesn't reference alternative tools, but the named downstream use is sufficient guidance.

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