update-excel-table-row

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: the zero-based row index and the exact body format ({ values: [[...]] }). It does not contradict annotations.

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 two concise lines, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by a focused tip. Every word contributes value; no fluff or repetition of schema content.

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?

For an update operation with no output schema and high schema coverage, the description is adequate. It covers the essential body format and indexing. A minor gap: it does not explicitly state that the row contents are fully replaced (versus partial updates), but this is reasonably inferred from the term 'update' and the body structure.

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 high (88%), so most parameters are self-explanatory, but the body parameter is an untyped object in the schema. The description compensates by specifying the required structure ('values' array with one inner array matching column count) and clarifying that 'index' is zero-based.

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 action ('Update an Excel table row') and the resource (a single row in a formal Excel table). It also clarifies the indexing scheme (zero-based) and the specific body structure, which differentiates it from sibling tools like add-excel-table-rows and delete-excel-table-row.

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 modifying an existing row in a formal Excel table, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or provide conditions like 'use this instead of add-excel-table-rows when modifying existing data.' The tip adds operational detail but no alternative routing.

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