elements_get_element_columnsList columns for a specific element in a workbook using the required workbook ID and element ID. Use it to inspect an element's schema and column structure.
List columns for a specific element in a workbook.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| element_id | Yes | ||
| workbook_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond restating that this is a listing operation, such as permissions, pagination, or scope limitations.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. For a simple read tool, this is appropriately sized and easy to parse.
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?
The tool is simple, read-only, and has an output schema, reducing the description's burden. However, it still omits parameter semantics and usage guidance, leaving the definition minimally adequate rather than complete.
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%, so the description must explain workbook_id and element_id. It only vaguely implies 'a specific element in a workbook' and does not clarify ID formats, requiredness, or how the element is identified.
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 states a clear verb and resource: 'List columns' for 'a specific element in a workbook.' It distinguishes the element-scoped resource from workbook-level column listing siblings, though it does not explicitly name an alternative tool.
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?
It gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. The intended usage is only implied by the purpose statement itself.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.