spreadsheet_get_styles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic operation of getting styling information, with no disclosure of potential behaviors such as permissions required, cost of retrieval, or handling of empty ranges. This is insufficient for a read operation.

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 concise at one sentence with a useful usage note. It is front-loaded but could benefit from slightly more structure (e.g., separating purpose from parameters). No wasted words.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format (e.g., what the styling data looks like), error conditions, or behavior for edge cases like invalid ranges. The tool is for complex styling data and needs more detail.

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 input schema already describes all parameters. The description adds only the note 'Provide either file_id or name', which is already implied by the schema. It does not provide additional semantic depth beyond the schema.

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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'cell styling information (fonts, colors, alignment, number formats)', and specifies the scope 'for a range in a Synology Spreadsheet'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like spreadsheet_read_sheet and spreadsheet_write_styles.

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 usage by saying 'Provide either file_id or name', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like spreadsheet_read_sheet for reading cell values or spreadsheet_write_styles for writing styles. No when-not or alternative guidance is given.

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