format-excel-range-border

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and non-read-only, and the description adds valuable behavioral nuance: it modifies only one border side per call, requiring multiple calls for a complete outline. This behavior is not derivable from the schema or annotations alone. It does not warn about overwriting existing border formatting, but the destructive hint covers the risk profile.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and the tip is dense and immediately actionable. It wastes no words and does not repeat schema details.

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?

For a tool with moderate complexity (9 params, 6 required, nested body) and no output schema, the description plus the rich parameter schema covers the essential usage pattern. It tells the agent how to select a side and how to achieve a full border outline. It does not discuss return values or confirm-gate behavior, but those are either not defined or already described in the schema.

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 schema covers most parameters (89%) including body color/style/weight enums and path segment descriptions. The description adds essential semantics by enumerating the sideIndex values (EdgeTop through DiagonalUp), which the schema leaves as a generic 'Value for the sideIndex path segment.' This lifts it above the baseline.

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 opens with 'Format an Excel range border,' a specific verb+resource that immediately identifies the tool's purpose. The tip further clarifies that it sets one border side at a time, distinguishing it from sibling formatting tools like format-excel-range-fill and format-excel-range-font.

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 'Sets one border side' and explains how sideIndex selects among the eight possible sides. It gives a clear directive for the common full-outline use case: 'To outline all four edges, call once per side.' It lacks explicit comparison to alternate tools, but the usage context is well defined.

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