excel_recalculate_workbook

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It reveals creating a new artifact but does not specify if the original workbook is modified, what happens to the output_path (overwrite?), or any side effects. The conditional on LibreOffice introduces ambiguity without resolution.

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 a single sentence, highly concise, but it omits necessary detail. While not verbose, it sacrifices clarity for brevity, making it borderline under-specified.

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 2 required parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (not detailed), the description fails to explain prerequisites (e.g., LibreOffice installation), return value, or edge cases. Incomplete for a tool with dependencies.

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 adds no explanation for the two parameters (doc_id, output_path). It only uses basic schema titles, leaving the agent to infer their meaning from context, which is insufficient.

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?

Description clearly states the action (recalculate workbook) and outcome (write new artifact) with a specific conditional (using LibreOffice when available). It differentiates from sibling excel tools like excel_evaluate_formulas, though could be more explicit about the recalculation scope.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention cases where LibreOffice might be unavailable or fallback behavior. Sibling tools include other excel_* functions, but no differentiation is provided.

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