Excel Tool Help

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond that: it specifies what each invocation mode returns and explicitly states 'Reads no file.' This is useful context for an agent deciding whether to call it.

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 compact and front-loaded: it opens with the core read-only help purpose, then explains triggers and modes in a single efficient paragraph. No sentence is wasted.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description explains what the help tool returns in each mode: a full tool/op list when called without arguments, an op's arguments and example when 'op' is supplied, and a location-object explanation for 'topic=location.' Combined with the annotations, this is complete for a help tool.

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%, so the schema already documents both optional parameters. The description reinforces their behavior but largely repeats what the schema says, adding only slight extra detail such as returning 'the tool that runs it.' Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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 states a specific resource ('help') and distinguishes it from the sibling operation tools by explaining that it is read-only, lists tools and ops, and provides argument and example details. An agent can immediately tell this is the documentation/help tool rather than an Excel operation.

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?

It gives explicit invocation conditions: when an op's arguments are unclear or after a BAD_PARAMS refusal. It also explains the distinct behavior for no arguments, for 'op', and for 'topic=location', leaving little ambiguity about when and how to call it.

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