Spreadsheet overview

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool returns (sheet names, size, header row, column types, samples) and implies a read-only overview operation, but it does not explicitly say whether it modifies anything, how errors are handled, or how 'size' and 'samples' are defined. This is adequate but not deeply transparent.

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 sentences with no filler. The first sentence leads with when to call the tool and the prohibition on built-in readers, and the second compactly lists the returned overview contents. Every phrase earns its place.

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?

For a one-parameter overview tool, the description covers the trigger, the supported file types, and the key return elements. It lacks an explicit output structure and more detail on relationship to sibling sheet tools, but it is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 already documents the single required path parameter with supported extensions and tilde expansion. The description only restates 'any spreadsheet or CSV file path,' adding no new semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies this as the entry point for spreadsheet and CSV files and specifies the exact overview contents: sheet names, size, header row, column types, and samples. It distinguishes from built-in file readers, but it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools like sheet_read or sheet_query, so it stops just short of full differentiation.

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?

It explicitly says to call this tool for any spreadsheet or CSV file path and warns that built-in file readers cannot parse spreadsheets and must not be used. 'Start here' gives a clear sequencing cue, but it does not name the sibling alternatives for subsequent data access, so the guidance is strong yet not fully alternative-aware.

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