wps_et_get_sheets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'list all worksheet names', which implies a read-only operation but does not mention return format, whether it operates on the active workbook, or any potential side effects. This is minimal and does not go beyond the basic purpose.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's function. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource, containing no redundant words 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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely complete. It clearly communicates the purpose, though it doesn't specify the exact return structure (e.g., an array of strings). For a simple listing tool, this is sufficient for an agent to understand its function.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline score is 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate since there are none to document. No additional meaning is needed beyond the schema.

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 '列出工作簿中的所有工作表名' clearly states the action (list), the resource (worksheet names in the workbook), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like wps_et_get_workbook_info by focusing specifically on sheet names. It is unambiguous and directly conveys the tool's purpose.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply states what it does, leaving the usage context implied. There are no alternative names or exclusions mentioned, so the agent must infer that this is the tool for listing sheet names.

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