list_excel_sheets

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only listing action, but does not disclose potential error behavior, sorting, or return format. For a basic 'list' tool, the lack of further detail is not egregious, but there is room for improvement.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, and includes a useful parenthetical purpose. No redundant words 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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema. The description explains what it does and why it is used, which is nearly sufficient. Mentioning the return format (e.g., an array of sheet names) would make it complete, but the current description is not inadequate.

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?

The schema already describes the only parameter (xlsxPath) with 100% coverage, so the description adds little beyond repeating the file type. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 uses a clear verb ('List') and resource ('worksheet names in an .xlsx/.xlsm file'), which precisely states what the tool does. It also includes the purpose ('so you can pick the one to stage'), which helps distinguish it from other Excel/CSV-related tools like stage_excel_to_csv.

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 the tool is used before staging an Excel file to CSV, providing clear context. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use it, but the use case is adequately conveyed for a simple listing operation.

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