Write Data to Excel

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

The description adds 'append' behavior to the write operation, providing nuance beyond the destructiveHint annotation. However, it does not explicitly state whether writing to a range overwrites existing cells or merges data, leaving some ambiguity. Given the annotation already signals potential destructiveness, a 4 is appropriate as it adds useful context without full clarity.

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 concise: a clear one-sentence summary, a structured parameter list, and two 'Use when' examples plus one 'Don't use when'. It is well-organized and front-loaded with the primary purpose. No unnecessary words.

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?

The description explains the tool works on existing files, not new ones, and uses examples to illustrate common use cases. It does not detail error conditions (e.g., file not found, sheet not found) or exactly how data is written (overwrite or append). However, given the moderate complexity and presence of annotations, it provides sufficient context for most scenarios. A 4 reflects the minor gaps.

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 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing examples for startCell and showing how parameters are used in context (e.g., 'starting at B3'). The Args section mirrors the schema but also clarifies default values. This additional context justifies a score of 4.

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 uses specific verbs 'write' and 'append' to describe the action on an existing Excel file. It explicitly contrasts with the sibling tool office_create_excel, preventing confusion. The examples further clarify usage scenarios.

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 includes 'Use when' and 'Don't use when' examples that explicitly state when this tool is appropriate and when to use the sibling tool office_create_excel instead. This provides clear guidance for the AI agent to choose correctly.

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