Create Office file or VBA project

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, non-open-world. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the template comes from the application itself so the file opens without a repair prompt, and it never overwrites or replaces existing content. Return-value behavior is left to the output schema, which exists.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scoping constraint in the first sentence; subsequent sentences carry distinct payloads (extensions, non-overwrite guarantee, sibling routing). Slightly long and dense, but no sentence is filler.

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 annotations covering safety semantics, an output schema covering returns, and 100% schema parameter documentation, the description fills the remaining gaps: format selection, overwrite behavior, and the hand-off to xlide_write_module. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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% for the single parameter, so the baseline would be 3. The description adds real meaning: the extension selects the format, enumerates valid extensions, and notes the one case where the path may point at an existing file rather than a new one.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Creates a new Office file with an empty VBA project') plus the exact extensions supported, and clearly separates itself from xlide_write_module, which handles the first module. An agent can distinguish this from xlide_list_projects/xlide_project_info without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly covers when to use it (new file creation, or an existing .docm/.accdb with no project), what it will not do (never overwrites a file or replaces an existing project), and names the alternative tool (xlide_write_module) for the case of a macro-capable file saved before its first macro.

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