excel_protect_worksheet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action ('protect') but does not disclose behavioral traits like whether this is a destructive operation (likely yes, as it modifies worksheet security), permission requirements, rate limits, or what happens on failure. The description is minimal and misses critical context for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's purpose, though it could benefit from additional context.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, mutation operation) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not address behavioral aspects, parameter details, or usage scenarios, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool 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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'password' but does not explain the 7 parameters (e.g., 'worksheetName', boolean flags like 'allowFormatCells'). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, failing to clarify parameter meanings or usage.

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 'Protect a worksheet with a password' clearly states the verb ('protect') and resource ('worksheet'), specifying that password protection is involved. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'excel_add_worksheet' or 'excel_delete_worksheet' by focusing on security, but does not explicitly differentiate from other protection-related tools (none listed in siblings).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context such as prerequisites (e.g., needing an open workbook), when not to use it (e.g., if worksheet is already protected), or comparisons to other tools (e.g., 'excel_add_worksheet' for creation).

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