xlsx_macros

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds critical behavioral detail: deliberately does not extract or execute macro source code, uses heuristic UTF-16LE scan, and returns safety advice to relay to the user. No contradiction.

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 into distinct sections (purpose, policy, usage). It is slightly verbose but each sentence adds value. The most critical information is front-loaded.

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 and lack of output schema, the description adequately explains the return value (presence, size, module names, safety advice) and limitations. Missing: explicit mention of input format (base64) and potential error cases, but overall sufficient.

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%. The description does not explicitly explain the 'file_b64' parameter (that it expects a base64-encoded file). The purpose is implied but not clarified, which could lead to incorrect usage.

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 uses specific verbs ('Inspect', 'Returns') and resources ('xlsm / xlsb workbooks for VBA macro presence'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools that analyze other xlsx aspects by focusing solely on macro detection and metadata.

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?

Provides explicit 'USE WHEN' and 'DO NOT USE WHEN' sections, detailing appropriate scenarios (unknown sender, auditing) and when to avoid (need to inspect VBA source), along with a concrete alternative (open in Excel).

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