list_worksheets

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

With no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the action. It does not explicitly say it is read-only, describe the returned worksheet metadata, or mention any prerequisites beyond the implied workbook.

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?

One sentence with no filler, and the core action and object are front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a one-parameter list call, the description gives the essential subject and storage location. It is complete enough for a straightforward call, but with no output schema or annotations it omits the return shape and how to obtain a valid file_id.

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% and the description never names file_id. It only implies that the parameter identifies an Excel workbook in OneDrive/SharePoint, so it partially compensates but leaves the parameter meaning to be inferred.

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 states a specific action ('List') and a distinct resource ('worksheets in an Excel workbook'), and it adds storage context (OneDrive/SharePoint). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list_tables and read_range.

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 use case: you need the worksheets in an Excel workbook stored in OneDrive/SharePoint. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over related siblings or provide exclusions.

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