excel_add_sheet

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

描述未披露任何行为细节（如添加工作表的位置、对现有工作表的影响、是否可能失败等）。虽然注释提供了readOnlyHint=false，但描述本身未补充任何额外背景。

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?

描述仅5个字符，过于简短，属于欠规格而非精炼。虽然简洁，但未提供任何有效信息，未能体现'每个句子都应赢得其位置'的原则。

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?

工具是可变操作且无输出schema，描述未说明添加工作表的完整行为（如是否创建空表、默认位置、返回值等），对于代理正确调用来说信息不足。即使参数简单，描述也未能提供必要的上下文。

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?

输入schema已完整描述所有三个参数（workbookId、sheetName、tabColor），覆盖率达100%。描述未添加任何参数层面的额外说明，但基于基线规则，schema已经承担了语义职责。

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?

描述仅为'添加工作表'，直接重复了工具名称和标题，未提供任何超出名称的具体说明，也未与兄弟工具（如excel_write_data、excel_add_chart）进行区分。

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?

描述完全没有提供任何使用场景、前提条件或与其他工具的对比，无法帮助代理决定何时使用此工具而非替代方案。

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