wps_word_insert_image

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It warns about silent interception and insertion failure if the path is unauthorized, which is critical information beyond the schema.

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 front-loaded with the purpose statement. The caution about sandbox restrictions is necessary but somewhat verbose. It earns its place but could be slightly trimmed.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core functionality and a critical behavioral nuance. It adequately prepares the agent for using the tool in sandboxed environments.

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 coverage is 100% and parameter descriptions are already clear. The description reinforces path authorization but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 '在光标处插入图片' (insert image at cursor) with specific verb and resource. Among siblings, it distinguishes itself as a Word-specific image insertion tool, unlike wps_word_insert_text or wps_wpp_insert_image.

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 by detailing WPS sandbox authorization constraints and recommending placing images in ~/Downloads. It does not include when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but the precautions are highly actionable.

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