insert-excel-range

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

The annotations already mark the tool as destructive (destructiveHint: true) and not read-only (readOnlyHint: false). The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by specifying that existing content is shifted, which clarifies what the destructive behavior entails. 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 concise and front-loaded with the core action ('Insert an Excel range'). The tip adds necessary usage detail in just two sentences, with no waste. The emoji and tip formatting make the key guidance stand out without increasing length.

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 has no output schema, so the description should cover the core behavior and key parameters, which it does. It explains the essential 'shift' parameter and the overall effect. It does not mention return values or the required path parameters, but those are well-documented in the schema, and the absence of an output schema lowers the expectation for return-value details.

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 (88%), so the bar is lowered. However, the body parameter, especially the 'shift' property, lacks a description in the schema. The description compensates by explaining the allowed values ('Down' or 'Right') and their meaning, which is essential for correct usage.

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 states a specific verb ('Insert') and resource ('Excel range'), then clarifies the exact behavior ('Insert blank cells at the given range, shifting existing content'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update-excel-range, delete-excel-range, and clear-excel-range, which have different verbs and behaviors.

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 on how to use the tool by explaining the shift parameter ('Body: { shift: 'Down' } or { shift: 'Right' }') and its practical effect ('Use 'Down' to insert blank rows above existing data'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for an agent to decide when this tool is appropriate.

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