merge_cells

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It says only 'merge cell range' and offers no information about destructive effects, data loss, reversibility, or any side effects of merging. For a mutating operation, this is a critical omission.

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 single sentence is extremely short and front-loaded, but this is under-specification rather than concise efficiency. Essential details about parameters and behavior are absent, so brevity here is a defect, not a strength.

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?

With four required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides almost no contextual information. An agent would not know the coordinate system, range validation, or side effects. The definition is completely inadequate for safe and 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any of the four parameters (startRow, startCol, endRow, endCol). It fails to define what these coordinates mean, their constraints (e.g., start <= end), or the range they form. The description must compensate but does not.

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 '合并单元格区域' (merge cell range) clearly states the verb and resource, making the basic purpose understandable. However, it adds little beyond a direct translation of the tool name and does not differentiate the operation from siblings like set_cell_style or insert_row with any specific detail about the range or context.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention scenarios, prerequisites, or conditions under which merging cells is appropriate or preferable to other cell operations, leaving the agent without decision-support information.

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