sheets_add_conditional_formatting

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-destructive mutation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) that is idempotent. The description adds nothing beyond that: it doesn't say whether rules accumulate on a range, whether they can be overwritten or removed, or what permissions are needed.

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?

A single clean sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded and no wasted words. It is efficient, though arguably too terse to be fully useful.

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 6-parameter mutation tool with nested objects and no output schema, the full schema and annotations cover structural needs, but the description leaves behavioral questions open (rule accumulation, interaction with existing rules, effect on the target range).

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter including the nested format and color_scale objects is documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter meaning, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb (adds) and resource (conditional formatting rule) scoped to a range in a spreadsheet. The term 'conditional formatting' is distinct enough from siblings like sheets_format_cells or sheets_set_data_validation, though the description never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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 this tool versus sheets_format_cells (static formatting) or sheets_set_data_validation. No prerequisites, no mention of what happens when a rule already exists on the range.

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