excel_add_formula

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the tool is known to be a safe write operation. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context, such as whether existing cell content is overwritten, formula syntax requirements, or side effects.

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 only two Chinese characters, which is too terse to be considered appropriately concise. It lacks sentence structure and any informative content, making it seem like an under-specified fragment rather than a well-crafted description.

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?

This tool has four required parameters and no output schema. The description provides no information about tool behavior, return values, or error conditions, making it completely inadequate for an agent to use correctly in context.

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%, with clear descriptions for all four parameters (cell, formula, sheetName, workbookId). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is 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?

The description '添加公式' translates to 'Add formula', which is a specific verb+resource pairing. However, it is a bare phrase without the context of what 'adding a formula' entails or how it differs from sibling tools like excel_write_data, limiting its usefulness for tool selection.

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. There are no mentions of use cases, exclusions, or related tools, leaving the agent to infer when this tool should be invoked.

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