Set or remove list bullets

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds the key behavioral fact that removal happens when remove=true and that nesting depends on leading tabs. It also clarifies the exclusive-preset/remove constraint, which is central to correct invocation. Not quite a 5 because it doesn't explicitly warn that applying a preset may overwrite existing formatting, but the annotations cover the destructive aspect.

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 compact and front-loaded with the main operation, then gives the preset values and the behavioral nuance about tabs and the required-argument constraint. Every sentence contributes useful information, though the preset list is a bit dense; that density is justified because the presets are enums that an agent needs to choose from.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the required-argument rule, the range semantics, the preset choices, and nesting behavior. It doesn't describe error cases or what happens when the range contains non-paragraph elements, but the schema and annotations cover most invocation needs, making this slightly above average.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the preset list and the semantic distinction between bulleted and numbered presets, and it explains that remove=true means 'removes bullets,' which is useful beyond the schema's one-liner. It does not add much detail about tab_id or index meaning, but those are adequately described in the 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 names a precise operation ('Turns the paragraphs overlapping [start_index, end_index) into a list, or removes their bullets') with a concrete resource and clear mode distinction. It distinguishes itself from style_paragraph by focusing specifically on bullet/numbering application and removal, so an agent can tell it apart from siblings.

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?

It explicitly states that exactly one of preset or remove is required, defines the paragraph-range behavior, and explains how to create sub-items via leading tabs. It also has a clear note about tab_id omission, which orients the agent toward list_tabs when needing to target a different tab.

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