wps_get_cell_value

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds little beyond repeating the read operation, and it does not disclose behavior such as return format, empty-cell handling, or errors, but no contradiction 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?

The description is a single short sentence that is front-loaded and free of filler. It could add sibling differentiation, but for what it contains it is appropriately concise.

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 simple read operation with fully documented parameters and strong safety annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain the relationship to wps_excel_get_cell_value, and without an output schema it also omits what value format the agent should expect.

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 100%, and each parameter (sheet, row, col) has a meaningful description in the schema, so the description does not need to add parameter details. It adds no extra semantics, matching the baseline for well-covered schemas.

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 '读取指定单元格的值' clearly states the verb (read) and resource (a specified cell's value), so an agent knows exactly what operation the tool performs. However, it does not differentiate this tool from the sibling wps_excel_get_cell_value, which appears to serve the same purpose.

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 wps_excel_get_cell_value or wps_excel_read_range. There are no stated conditions, exclusions, or context for selection, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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