sheets_find_duplicates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond purpose, like how duplicates are handled or what a match means. With annotations doing the heavy lifting, a 3 is fair.

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 sentence with no waste, front-loaded with the action. Efficient and to the point.

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?

Complete enough for basic invocation since annotations cover safety and schema covers parameters. However, no output schema exists and the description does not explain the return format (e.g., row indices, counts), which would be useful for a read-only analysis tool. Adequate but with gaps.

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 the schema already documents range, columns, and spreadsheet_id semantics, including the 0-based indexing and default behavior for columns. The description mentions 'specified columns' but adds no syntax or format beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when schema carries the load.

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+resource: 'Finds duplicate rows in a range based on specified columns.' Clear what it does but no sibling differentiation beyond naming. An agent can tell it apart from sheets_find_replace or sheets_sort_range by the resource, but the description does not explicitly route to alternatives.

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 when-to-use or when-not guidance. There are 28 sibling tools and the description doesn't name any alternative or clarify context. Implied usage is weak; the agent must infer when this is preferable to reading and deduplicating manually.

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