xlsx_print_settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context by detailing what information is returned (print area, orientation, margins, headers, etc.), which goes beyond the annotations.

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 use cases and a brief technical note, but it is somewhat lengthy. Most sentences add value, though a slightly more streamlined version could improve readability without losing essential details.

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 complexity of print settings and the absence of an output schema, the description is quite comprehensive about what the tool returns and when to use it. However, the lack of parameter explanations is a notable gap, preventing full completeness for an AI agent.

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?

The input schema has two parameters (file_b64 and options.sheet) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain the meaning or format of these parameters, such that file_b64 is the base64-encoded file content. It only implies that the tool works on a workbook per worksheet, leaving a significant gap for an AI agent to use correctly.

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 tool's purpose: to surface Excel print settings per worksheet, listing numerous attributes. It distinguishes itself from siblings like xlsx_read by emphasizing that it provides a rolled-up view of print configuration that other tools do not capture.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool (before PDF/print, audit, extract print-titles) and when not to use it (for reading values, use xlsx_read). It also mentions the free tier cap (10k/mo), providing clear guidance for an AI agent.

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