List Spreadsheet Comments

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

Annotations already declare the tool safe (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive), so the description's burden is lighter. It adds the optional max_comments limiting behavior, but does not disclose return format or any other behavioral traits. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single sentence with front-loaded purpose and a brief optional parameter note. No filler or unnecessary detail, perfectly sized for a simple list tool.

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's simplicity, strong annotations, and existence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It states the action, the resource, and the optional limit. It lacks usage guidance, but that is already penalized in the usage_guidelines dimension.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that max_comments limits results, but leaves spreadsheet_id and user_google_email unaddressed. While these are somewhat self-explanatory from names, the description only partially covers parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb 'list' with a clear resource 'comments from a Google Spreadsheet', distinguishing it from sibling tools like manage_spreadsheet_comment (manage vs list) and list_document_comments/list_presentation_comments (different resources).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no prerequisites. It simply states what it does without contextualizing its place among siblings.

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