create_spreadsheet

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the side effect (creating a new spreadsheet), the default behavior when sheet_names is omitted, and the return contents (ID, URL, locale). However, it does not mention authentication requirements, potential errors, or behavior in edge cases like an empty sheet_names list.

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 well-structured with a one-line summary followed by Args and Returns sections. It is efficient and contains no filler. The slight redundancy of repeating 'Required' when the schema already encodes requiredness is minor and does not harm clarity.

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 simple three-parameter creation tool, the description covers the essential invocation details: required arguments, optional argument behavior, and return information. The main gaps are the lack of authentication prerequisites and edge-case behavior, but the presence of an output schema mitigates the need for detailed return explanations.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args section fully documents all three parameters, including types, requiredness, and the default behavior for sheet_names. This completely compensates for the missing schema descriptions and gives an agent enough information to construct a valid call.

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 and resource: "Creates a new Google Spreadsheet." It clearly identifies the tool's action and distinguishes it from the sibling create_sheet by specifying the entire spreadsheet rather than a single sheet. The included Args section further clarifies what the tool operates on.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_sheet or create_drive_file. It also does not mention prerequisites like prior authentication or authorization. Usage is only implied by the purpose statement, not explicitly explained.

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