add-excel-table-rows

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

The description repeats the action already implied by the name and annotations. It adds no new behavioral information (e.g., side effects, confirmation requirements, or data overwrite risks) beyond the existing destructiveHint. The only additional detail is the body format, which is parameter-related.

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 brief and front-loaded. The tip is clearly separated and provides essential formatting information without unnecessary verbosity.

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 combination of schema descriptions (86% coverage) and the description's body format example covers the essential usage. However, it lacks guidance on distinguishing this from similar Excel write operations and does not mention the confirm parameter's purpose (which is in the schema) or return behavior.

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 description adds a concrete example of the body.values array and the constraint that each inner array must match the table's column count. This goes well beyond the schema's generic range description, making the parameter usage clear.

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's function: 'Add Excel table rows' and 'Adds rows to a table.' It is specific to table rows rather than ranges, but it doesn't explicitly differentiate from insert-excel-range or other row manipulation tools.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (adding rows to a table) but does not mention alternatives or exclusions, so it doesn't fully guide selection among sibling Excel tools.

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