unmerge-excel-range

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true, so description adds limited value beyond that. It notes 'no request body' and the inverse relationship, but does not disclose edge cases (e.g., behavior when range has no merged cells) or permission requirements. With annotations present, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Description is extremely short (two sentences) yet covers purpose and inverse. Every sentence is essential. No filler or redundancy. Appropriate for a simple tool.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description is fairly complete: it states purpose, inverse relationship, and hints about no body. However, it omits what the response format is (no output schema), and could mention that the address parameter defines the range. Still, it covers the core needs for an agent.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. Description adds no additional meaning beyond what schema provides; the 'no request body' hint is indirectly about the parameter body, but not specific to any parameter. Baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'unmerge' and resource 'any merged cells within the given range', and distinguishes itself by noting it is the inverse of merge-excel-range. This provides precise purpose and sibling differentiation.

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 tip 'Inverse of merge-excel-range' implies when to use (to undo a merge), but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to other sibling tools like clear-excel-range. The context is clear but lacks exclusion guidance.

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