convert_word_to_markdown

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 only states the conversion intent without mentioning dependencies (e.g., Pandoc), side effects, output behavior, or what happens to media files — significant gaps for correct usage.

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, direct sentence with no filler, clearly stating the core function in a compact manner. Every word serves a purpose.

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?

Given the tool has a nested options object, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too thin. It fails to explain what happens after conversion, whether Pandoc is required, or how optional parameters (e.g., outputPath, extractMedia) affect the result, leaving important context missing.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline of 3 applies. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already documents.

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 ('轉換' - convert) and the resource ('Word (.docx) 文件' to 'Markdown 文件'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like convert_markdown_to_word (reverse direction) and check_pandoc_installation (dependency check).

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 implies the tool is for converting Word documents to Markdown, and sibling names clarify alternatives, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor any mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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