set_worksheet_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It does not state whether the tool overwrites existing data, appends, or requires a specific sheet state. The return value is only 'Success message', lacking details on side effects or failure modes.

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 extremely concise and well-structured, using a standard Args/Returns format. Every sentence is necessary and provides relevant information without any redundancy or filler.

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 moderate complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, output schema exists but minimal), the description provides essential information but lacks details on error handling, sheet creation behavior, or data replacement semantics. It is sufficient for basic usage but incomplete for robust agent decision-making.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well. It explains each parameter, including the format for 'columns' (JSON array of arrays) with an example, and clarifies that 'column_names' is optional comma-separated. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's minimal type/title definitions.

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 'Write data to an Origin worksheet' with a specific verb and resource. It also explains the columns parameter format. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like import_csv_to_worksheet or set_column_properties, which could cause confusion for an AI agent.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context such as whether the worksheet must already exist. The only implicit usage is for writing data, but no explicit differentiation is made.

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