xlsx_read

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds critical context: path resolution differences between local and remote deployments, default returns all sheets, format synonyms, and the fact that the server's filesystem is used. No contradictions with 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 sections and front-loaded key information. However, it is slightly verbose due to detailed path explanations and synonyms. Every sentence adds value, but some redundancy could be trimmed.

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 required 'file_b64' parameter and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It addresses path-based reading but ignores the file_b64 parameter entirely, creating a significant gap. The tool's behavior regarding base64 input is undocumented, which hinders correct invocation.

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 description fails to explain the required 'file_b64' parameter (a base64 string) despite focusing on path-based reading. While it partially explains the 'options' sub-parameters (format, sheet), it omits 'maxRows'. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not adequately cover all parameters.

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 reads .xlsx files and returns a markdown/JSON/SQL representation. It effectively distinguishes itself from siblings like xlsx_read_handle by specifying different use cases (path-based vs. handle-based).

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use (path on server's filesystem) and when-not-to-use (paperclip upload, remote user files, in-memory bytes). Also notes default behavior of returning all sheets, preventing redundant calls.

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