LibreOffice MCP Tools

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait of returning formulas rather than values, which is crucial. However, it doesn't mention permissions needed, rate limits, error conditions, or output format details, leaving gaps for a read operation.

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 that front-loads the core purpose and adds critical clarification about returning formulas vs. values. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 read operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential 'what' but lacks details on output structure, error handling, or dependencies. It's minimally viable but leaves the agent guessing about the return format and potential limitations.

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%, so the schema fully documents parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('all formulas in a spreadsheet range'), specifying it returns formula expressions rather than computed values. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like spreadsheet_get_range (which likely returns values) and spreadsheet_set_cell/spreadsheet_set_range (which are write 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 context by specifying 'returns formula expressions, not computed values', suggesting when to use this vs. value-retrieval tools. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when-not-to-use conditions, though the distinction from computed values provides clear guidance.

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