create-excel-table

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds behavioral details: the range address determines the worksheet, errors on invalid address or overlap. It does not explicitly state it modifies the workbook, but creation implies modification. The addition of error conditions adds transparency beyond annotations.

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 concise: two short paragraphs plus a tip. The first sentence immediately states the main action. The tip is clearly formatted and adds crucial prerequisite information. No unnecessary words.

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 purpose, errors, and prerequisite relationship. However, it lacks information about the return value (e.g., the created table object or success status). Since there is no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns. This is a notable gap given the tool's complexity.

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 high (86%), but the description adds value by explaining the address and hasHeaders parameters through an example and noting that the address determines the worksheet. This goes beyond what the schema provides. For parameters already well-documented in schema, the description still offers practical context.

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 it creates a new table, defines the role of the address parameter, and distinguishes itself from related sibling tools like add-excel-table-rows by noting it is a prerequisite. The tip provides a concrete example, reinforcing the 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 explicitly states when to use the tool: required before add-excel-table-rows, update-excel-table-row, or delete-excel-table-row on a plain-cells sheet. It also mentions error conditions (invalid address, overlapping table) which guide when not to use. This provides clear usage context.

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