excel_get_cell

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description accurately states a read operation. No additional behavioral traits are disclosed (e.g., no mention of formatting, formula behavior, or performance). The description adds minimal value beyond the annotation.

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?

Extremely concise at 5 words in a single sentence. No superfluous information, and the core action is 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 simple read tool, the description is adequate but lacks completeness regarding return value (e.g., what is returned: raw value, formula result). No error handling or edge cases are mentioned. Given the low complexity, a 3 is fair.

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 has high description coverage (75%), so the description adds no extra meaning to parameters. The tool name and description imply the purpose of each parameter without further detail. Baseline 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 'Read value from a specific cell' uses a specific verb ('read') and resource ('specific cell'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like excel_read_range (range) and excel_update_cell (write). It is unambiguous and directly states the tool's purpose.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools (e.g., excel_read_range, excel_search_value), providing context on when to use get_cell over other read operations would improve usability.

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