excel_get_metadata

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or non-destructive, though 'get metadata' strongly implies it. It also does not mention error handling or side effects. For a simple metadata getter this is acceptable but not fully transparent.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, return contents, and usage advice. The purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value. No filler or redundancy.

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 a single parameter, no nested objects, and an output schema present, the description covers the essential information. It explains what to expect and when to use it. Minor gaps like error behavior or file existence are not critical given the simplicity and output schema availability.

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 schema provides only the parameter name 'file_path' with type string and 0% description coverage. The description adds meaningful context by clarifying 'Absolute or relative path to the Excel file' and specifying the supported file extensions (.xlsx/.xlsm). This compensates well for the minimal schema.

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 'Get metadata' and the resource 'Excel workbook (.xlsx/.xlsm)', and enumerates the returned items (sheet names, active sheet, dimensions, header preview). This specificity makes it unmistakably distinct from siblings like excel_read_sheet or excel_search, even without naming 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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool: 'Call this first before reading large sheets to inspect the structure.' This is clear and helpful. However, it does not mention when NOT to use it or name an alternative tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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