Delete Rows

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it explicitly states the operation is destructive and cannot be undone via the API, and describes the shifting effect. This provides comprehensive transparency.

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 with no fluff. It front-loads the main action and effect, then adds specifics and a critical warning. Every sentence is necessary and well-structured.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, behavior, and destructive nature. However, it omits information about the return value (no output schema exists). For a tool with four parameters, the description is largely complete but lacks this detail.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the count default and 1-based start_row but does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema's property descriptions already provide.

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 specifies that the tool permanently deletes a contiguous block of rows from a sheet tab, shifting rows upward. It uses specific verbs and resources ('deletes rows') and distinguishes from siblings by focusing on row deletion, unlike add_rows or update_row.

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 clear context (permanent deletion, shifting rows) but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives. It implies usage for removing rows, meeting the criteria for 'clear context, no exclusions'.

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