create_time_series

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors. It reveals that the tool writes formulas and is exempt from the 50-cell guard, which is useful. But it doesn't mention overwrite behavior, permissions, or side effects. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Two concise sentences, no redundancy. First sentence states core action, second adds an important exception. Every word earns its place.

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 complexity (6 parameters, nested array) and presence of an output schema, the description covers the main action and a key behavioral trait. However, it doesn't detail parameter structure or usage, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 only 17% (only target_range has a description). The description adds context for function_name (types of formulas) and target_range (write into), but leaves parameters (array of objects) and dry_run unexplained. Partially compensates but not fully.

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 tool builds and writes a time-series formula, listing specific formula types (VoseTimeGBM, VoseTimeAR1). It distinguishes from siblings like write_formula and fit_time_series by specifying the exact function and use case.

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 mentions exemption from the bulk-write guard, implying when to use this tool (for time series that naturally spill across many cells). However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it, missing a bit of guidance.

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