Forces Excel to recalculate an open workbook after writes, ensuring formula results are current before reading them back.
Force Excel to recalculate the workbook. Use after writes when you need formula results to be current before reading them back.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| type | No | Recalculation type. Default "Recalculate". | |
| workbookId | No | Target workbook ID from list_workbooks. Optional when only one workbook is connected. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral load. 'Force ... to recalculate' does convey a side effect on cached formula values, but it omits cost/latency, whether the workbook must be open or saved afterward, and what distinguishes the Full vs FullRebuild recalculation modes behaviorally.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed immediately by the condition that selects it. No filler, no repetition of the tool name or schema.
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 zero-required-param tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers the essential decision: when to call it. It could say what to expect in return or note the recalculation-type trade-offs, but nothing critical to correct invocation 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 description coverage is 100%, including the recalculation-type enum and the optional workbookId fallback, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds nothing about parameter choice, leaving the baseline of 3 appropriate.
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 ('Force ... to recalculate') and resource ('the workbook'), which is unambiguous and readily separable from siblings like refresh_pivottables or inspect_workbook. An agent knows exactly what the tool does without opening the 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?
Gives a clear trigger condition: use after writes when formula results must be current before reading back. It doesn't name explicit alternatives or exclusion cases (e.g., when a pivot refresh is the right choice instead), so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.