origin_pivot_worksheet

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the option to write to a new sheet vs. in-place, but does not clarify whether the original worksheet is modified when no output is specified. Missing details on error handling, permissions, or side effects.

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 four sentences, covering the main concepts efficiently. It is front-loaded with the core operation first. However, it could be more structured (e.g., separate sections for required vs. optional parameters).

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 8 parameters (2 required) and an output schema, the description covers the pivot operation but leaves ambiguity about source worksheet specification (book_name, sheet_name vs. output_book/output_sheet). Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

The description explains index, columns, values, aggfunc (listing options), and output_book/output_sheet. However, it does not explain book_name and sheet_name parameters, and the values parameter's behavior when null or omitted is unclear. Schema coverage is 0%, so description adds some value but not for all 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 reshapes long data into a wide pivot table, explaining index, columns, values, and aggfunc. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like melt or transpose, though the purpose is well-defined.

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 for creating pivot tables but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., melt for inverse operation). No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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