delete-excel-table-row

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds that only a single row is affected and that the index is zero-based, which is useful. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral details such as irreversibility or index shifting after deletion. It does not contradict 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 extremely concise, with only two sentences. The key action and the clarifying tip are both front-loaded and add value without fluff. Every word earns its place.

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 tool is a straightforward destructive row deletion. The description covers what it does and the critical index semantics. The schema covers all parameters, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description could mention consequences like row shifting, but that is not essential given the schema and annotations. Overall, it is adequately complete for this 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with property descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantic value by clarifying that the 'index' parameter is zero-based, which is not present in the schema's description ('Value for the index path segment'). This helps the agent correctly interpret and invoke the parameter.

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 'Delete an Excel table row' and further specifies 'Delete a single row from a formal Excel table by zero-based row index.' This is a specific verb+resource description that distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like delete-excel-range or list-excel-table-rows.

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: it is for deleting a single row from a formal Excel table and emphasizes the zero-based index. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the specific wording implies when this tool is appropriate versus related tools. No explicit 'when not to use' guidance, but enough context to guide selection.

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