origin_read_worksheet

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

No annotations exist. The description indicates a read operation (non-destructive) but fails to disclose behavior such as authorization requirements, return format details, or what happens if the worksheet is empty or missing. The burden falls entirely on the description, which is insufficient.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Efficient but could benefit from a brief list or separation of key points. Front-loaded with the core action.

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?

With 5 parameters (none required), no annotations, and an existing output schema (but not described), the description is too minimal. It does not explain the output format or the meaning of 'window' (row range), which is critical for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions 'a window' but does not explain parameters like 'book_name', 'sheet_name', 'start_row', 'max_rows', or 'columns'. The schema property names are self-explanatory, but the description adds no extra semantic value.

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 'Read' and the resource 'worksheet data', specifying 'a window' as the scope. It distinguishes from the sibling 'origin_write_worksheet' and other data manipulation tools.

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 alternatives like 'origin_diagnose_worksheet' or 'origin_get_graph_info'. The description only states what it does, not when it should be preferred.

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