sheets_add_tab

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the fact that it adds a tab. It fails to mention that this is a write/mutation operation, any permission requirements, error behavior, or side effects on existing data. The verb 'add' implies mutation, but the description lacks the contextual detail needed for safe autonomous use.

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 a single sentence of eight words, making it extremely concise and front-loaded. Every word contributes to the core message without any filler.

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 tool has four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. While the description states the core purpose, it lacks any guidance on behavior, such as what happens with a duplicate title or an out-of-range index, and does not provide any usage context beyond the single sentence. For a mutation tool with no structured metadata, this is insufficient.

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 (account, spreadsheet_id, title, and optional index). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it earns the baseline score of 3.

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 'Add' with a clear resource 'new sheet tab' and modifies it with 'to an existing spreadsheet,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like sheets_create (creating a new spreadsheet) and sheets_rename_tab/delete_tab (modifying existing tabs). This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 implies the tool is for adding to an existing spreadsheet, which sets it apart from sheets_create, but it does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions, so the guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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