xlsx_healer_cure

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds that the tool returns 'cured workbook bytes + receipt' and lists specific operations, providing context beyond the annotations. However, it does not explicitly describe the behavior for as_copy vs in_place modes.

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 well-structured with clear sections and front-loaded purpose, but the list of operations is somewhat dense. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description covers the main purpose, operations, and usage guidelines, but lacks explanations for 'cure_params' and 'intent' parameters, making it incomplete.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains the 'operation' parameter by listing allowed values, and implies 'file_b64' is the workbook file, but it does not describe 'cure_params', 'intent', or 'mode' parameters, leaving a significant gap.

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 'Apply ONE specific cure operation against a diagnosed workbook' and lists the supported operations, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like xlsx_healer_diagnose and xlsx_healer_intent.

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?

Explicit 'USE WHEN' and 'DO NOT USE WHEN' sections provide clear context for when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., xlsx_healer_intent for goal-shaped fixes), and prerequisites (diagnose must have been run).

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