Add Hyperlink

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

The description provides some behavioral detail: text_to_display defaults to the address itself, internal references use a '#' prefix, and a JSON confirmation is returned. However, with no annotations, the description carries the full burden and fails to disclose important side effects such as whether an existing cell value or hyperlink is overwritten, or error behavior when the address is invalid. Partial transparency with gaps around mutation consequences.

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 leads with a one-sentence purpose and then uses a clean Args list followed by a Returns line. Every line communicates a parameter or return behavior; there is no filler or redundancy. The structure is highly scannable and efficient.

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?

For a tool with six parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete: all parameters have defaults and examples, and the return value is described as JSON confirmation. Gaps remain around side-effect behavior and alternative tool usage, but those are relatively minor for invoking the tool successfully.

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%, so the description must explain all parameters. It does so thoroughly: workbook and sheet default to active objects, cell is A1-style single-cell, address includes URL and internal '#' examples, text_to_display defaults to the address, and screen_tip is defined. This fully compensates for the missing schema-level descriptions.

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 action ('Add a hyperlink') and target resource ('to a cell'). The verb 'Add' uniquely distinguishes it from the sibling tools remove_hyperlink and list_hyperlinks, making the operation unambiguous even without explicit differentiation.

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 makes the usage context obvious: use this when a hyperlink should be added to a cell. It includes helpful default context ('None = active workbook/sheet') but does not mention alternatives like list_hyperlinks or remove_hyperlink, nor any conditions for avoiding this tool. Clear context, but no explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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