wps_et_get_workbook_info

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

The description indicates a read operation by the verb 'get' and lists the information returned, but it does not explicitly state it is read-only, mention error conditions, or confirm no side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the burden and is minimally adequate.

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 sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. It is concise with no unnecessary words, earning its place by efficiently conveying the tool's purpose.

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 covers the purpose and output items but lacks details on the return format or data type. Since there is no output schema, the description could be more complete by stating how the information is structured. Adequate for a simple tool but with a clear gap.

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 description does not need to add parameter meaning. Schema coverage is trivially 100%. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description does not contradict this.

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 tool gets current workbook information, listing three specific items (name, number of sheets, current sheet name). It has a specific verb '获取' (get) and resource '当前工作簿信息' (current workbook info), distinguishing it from sibling tools like wps_et_get_sheets which focuses on sheet-level data.

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. There is no mention of when not to use it, prerequisites, or which sibling tools might be more appropriate for related tasks.

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