Append Table Rows

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is non-readOnly, non-destructive, non-idempotent, and openWorld. The description adds that rows are appended to the end and the table range auto-extends. This adds some behavioral context, but no details about limits, permissions, or side effects beyond what annotations convey.

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 plus a single directive. Every sentence serves a purpose: stating the action, clarifying the automatic extension, and providing a usage hint. No wasted words, and front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 low complexity and the presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description adequately covers what the tool does, the required parameters, and a prerequisite step. However, it omits potential error cases or limits (e.g., max rows), which would be useful for a complete picture.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value by explaining that rows are added to the end of the table body, auto-extending the range, and specifying that `table_id` should come from `list_sheet_tables`. This aids understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 verb 'appends rows to a structured table' and the resource (Google Sheet table). It mentions automatic extension of the table range, which distinguishes behavior from similar tools like modify_sheet_values, but does not explicitly differentiate from create_table_with_data or other siblings.

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 a prerequisite ('Use list_sheet_tables first to find the table ID'), which gives context for when to use the tool. However, it does not specify when not to use it or compare with alternatives like modify_sheet_values, leaving room for potential misuse.

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