xlsx_tables

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds that the tool works only on LOCAL workbooks and that it enumerates tables that pandas cannot read. This provides meaningful context beyond annotations without 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 concise with clear sections and front-loaded purpose. The USE WHEN/DO NOT USE WHEN format is helpful. Slight redundancy (e.g., 'pandas cannot see ListObjects' repeats the uniqueness point) but overall well-structured and not overly long.

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 no output schema, the description mentions returned fields (name, sheet, range, flags, columns) but does not detail the output format or provide examples. Parameter details are missing. For a tool with 2 parameters (one nested) and no output schema, the description should cover these gaps but does not fully do so.

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%, meaning no parameter descriptions in the schema itself. The description does not explain file_b64 (base64 file) or the options parameter (include_columns, sheet). While the tool's purpose implies file_b64, the options are left completely unexplained, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 verb (list) and resource (Excel ListObjects in a local .xlsx workbook), including specifics like name, sheet, range, and flags. It distinguishes from siblings by noting that pandas cannot see ListObjects, making this the only way to enumerate them.

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: use when the user references a named table or needs to discover tables before reading; avoid when there are no Excel Tables or for upload/attached files. This is excellent guidance for tool selection.

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