excel_overview

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful non-obvious traits beyond annotations: it avoids loading the whole sheet, returns only two sample rows, and warns that cell text is untrusted data.

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?

Two tightly written sentences front-load the tool's scope and outputs, then append the key behavioral caveats. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy or 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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description covers scope, sample behavior, performance, and security. It omits explicit usage guidance versus siblings and parameter format details, but is otherwise complete enough to invoke correctly.

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 single required 'path' parameter has no description in the schema. The tool description never explains the path parameter's expected format or constraints, so it fails to compensate for the low 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?

States a specific verb ('Summarize') and resource ('every sheet'), then enumerates the exact output contents: hidden state, declared size, detected tables, and two sample rows. The phrase 'Does not load the whole sheet' further distinguishes it from full-read siblings like excel_read_range and excel_read_table.

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 implies a lightweight overview use case by noting it does not load the whole sheet, but it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over siblings such as excel_list_sheets or excel_inspect_layout. No exclusions or alternatives are named, leaving usage to inference.

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