vtable_find_cellFind cells within a VTable by text, including headers, and retrieve their column, row, and value.
在 VTable 全表（含表头）中按文本查找单元格，返回 {col,row,value} 列表。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | 要查找的文本 | |
| exact | No | 是否精确匹配（默认包含匹配） | |
| tab_id | No | 标签页 id | |
| max_results | No | 最多返回条数 | |
| table_index | No | 表序号（注意：此处为字符串形式的索引，如 "0"） |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotation readOnlyHint is present, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the detail that the search includes headers, but does not disclose any other behavioral aspects such as performance implications or result limits.
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 concise sentence that clearly states the purpose. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, with no unnecessary details.
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 description is complete for a simple read-only search function. It mentions the return structure and the scope (entire table including headers). The output schema exists, so additional details are not required.
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 descriptions cover 100% of the parameters, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any additional parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema.
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 clearly states the tool's function: searching for cells by text in the entire VTable including headers, and returning a list of {col, row, value}. This is a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from other VTable operations.
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 usage for text search but does not explicitly compare with sibling tools or state when to prefer this over other VTable functions. It provides no alternative guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.