wps_et_clear_range

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'clear range content' without explaining side effects (e.g., irreversible, affects formulas, clears formatting). The agent is left guessing the operation's exact consequences.

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 a single short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks necessary details about the clearing operation. For a tool with one parameter, it could easily include behavioral context without being verbose.

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 tool's single parameter, lack of output schema, and absence of annotations, the description is critically incomplete. It does not describe what gets cleared, return values, undo behavior, or impact on other cells. The agent cannot reliably use this tool based solely on the description.

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 100% (one parameter 'range' with description '区域，如 A1:D10'). However, the tool description adds no additional meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema already provides. It does not explain the format, supported ranges, or behavior when range is invalid.

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?

Description '清空区域内容' (Clear range content) is a tautology of the tool name 'wps_et_clear_range'. It restates the name without specifying what 'clear' entails (values, formatting, or both), and does not distinguish it from siblings like wps_et_write_range which could also empty a range.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., wps_et_write_range with empty string). There is no mention of prerequisites, scope (clears values only vs formatting), or whether it respects merged cells.

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