gam_read_admin_sheet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It states 'reads' implying a safe, read-only operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as permission requirements, rate limits, or that it impersonates a user via 'userEmail'. This is minimal for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, front-loaded with the action verb 'Reads'. No unnecessary words. It is concise, though it could be slightly more informative without losing brevity.

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 has three required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is adequate but not comprehensive. It explains the primary purpose but lacks details on return format, error conditions, or required permissions. For a simple read operation, it is minimally viable.

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 adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. It mentions 'worksheet range', which aligns with the 'range' parameter, but does not clarify the format or usage of other parameters.

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 it reads a worksheet range and its purpose to feed administrative scripts. The verb 'reads' and resource 'worksheet range' are specific. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools, though the context implies it is for reading rather than mutating.

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?

No guidance on when to use or avoid this tool. The description does not mention alternatives or conditions. The phrase 'to feed administrative execution scripts' hints at a specific use case but does not provide explicit usage context.

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