create-excel-table

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

The description confirms the destructive nature (create operation) consistent with annotations (destructiveHint: true), and adds context about error generation on invalid address or overlap. It does not contradict annotations. The description adds value by specifying the behavior when the table cannot be added, beyond what annotations provide.

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 two paragraphs, with a clear first sentence and a helpful tip. It is relatively concise and front-loaded with the main action. However, the error condition could be integrated more tightly. Overall, it is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 has 6 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and error condition but lacks details on return values, authentication requirements, or full parameter usage. The tip about being a prerequisite is useful. Schema coverage helps, but the description could be more complete to fully inform the agent.

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 coverage is 83% (5/6 parameters have descriptions, mostly 'Path parameter: X'). The description adds some meaning by linking the 'address' property in body to determining the worksheet, but does not elaborate on other parameters like driveId, includeHeaders, etc. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline is 3, and the description provides marginal additional 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 clearly states 'Create a new table' and explains how the range address determines the worksheet. It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying that this is required before using add-excel-table-rows, update-excel-table-row, and delete-excel-table-row on a plain-cells sheet. The error condition is also mentioned, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 a tip to 'Convert a worksheet range into a formal Excel table' and explicitly states that it is a prerequisite for row operations siblings. It also mentions error conditions when the table cannot be added. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives beyond the implied need to have a table first.

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