merge-excel-range

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive (destructiveHint: true). The description adds behavioral detail about the merge operation—specifically that body.across determines whether the entire range merges into one cell or each row merges separately. It doesn't warn about potential data loss when merging non-empty cells, but this is partially covered by the destructive hint.

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 plus a clearly structured tip. It front-loads the action and explains behavior without unnecessary length or repetition.

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 mutation tool with a rich schema, the description is sufficiently complete: it covers the core merging behavior, the two modes, and a use case. It lacks details on return values and prerequisites, but these are not critical given the schema and absence of an output 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?

Schema description coverage is high (88%), but the description adds essential meaning to the body.across parameter by explaining that false merges the whole range into one cell and true merges each row separately. This goes beyond the bare type/default in the schema.

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 'Merge an Excel range' and specifies that it merges cells into a single cell (or row-wise with across: true). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like unmerge-excel-range and other Excel formatting tools.

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 use cases ('building styled headers, banner rows, and report layouts') and explains the two merge modes (across: false vs true), which implies when each setting is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with alternatives like unmerge-excel-range or mention when not to use it.

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