excel_write

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default draft banner behavior but fails to mention whether files are overwritten, how errors are handled, or what the return value looks like. For a write operation, this is incomplete.

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 a single concise sentence in Vietnamese, easy to parse and free of unnecessary detail. It is efficient but very short, so it does not waste words.

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?

With 6 parameters, 2 required, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the expected structure of rows, the meaning of path, or the effect of dry_run, making it inadequate for correct invocation.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the parameters. It only alludes to the draft banner default without naming draft_banner, and provides no meaning for path, rows, server, dry_run, or sheet_name.

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 the tool exports a table to Excel and mentions a default draft stamp, giving a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like csv_write or json_write, which also write data files, so it lacks sibling distinction.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as csv_write or json_write. It does not mention exclusions, conditions, or contexts that would help an agent decide between them.

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