wps_word_get_paragraphs

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

The description indicates the tool reads by paragraph, returning strings, and has a configurable limit. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. It is transparent about behavior but could mention whether formatting is preserved or if the output is plain text. Still, the core behavior is clear.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences that convey purpose, output format, and usage context. No superfluous information. Every word earns its place.

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's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is complete. It explains what it does, how it returns data, and when to use it. No missing context for effective usage.

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 parameter 'max_paragraphs' is described in the schema as '最多返回段落数，默认 200', which is clear. The description reiterates '每段一个字符串' but adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 tool reads the current document by paragraphs, returning each paragraph as a string. It distinguishes itself by noting suitability for long documents or locating specific paragraphs, differentiating from tools like wps_word_read, wps_word_get_selection, and wps_word_get_outline.

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 explicitly mentions use cases: reading long documents or locating paragraphs. It implies this is for sequential paragraph reading. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or provide alternatives among sibling tools, leaving some ambiguity about overlapping functions like wps_word_read or wps_word_get_outline.

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