wps_word_save

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively warns that omitting the path on an unsaved document would previously freeze the process but now raises an error instead. It also explains the sandbox constraint on the path. Missing details about overwrite behavior or return values, but the key safety behaviors are 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?

The description is concise, comprising three focused sentences. It front-loads the core action, then adds necessary conditional behavior and a practical suggestion. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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), the description is quite complete. It covers the main behavioral nuance (path requirement for first save) and the sandbox aspect. It does not elaborate on return values or error handling beyond the freeze mitigation, but these are minor omissions for a save tool.

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 already provides 100% coverage with a description for the single 'path' parameter. The tool description adds value by explaining when the parameter is required (first save) and the sandbox restriction with a recommended path (~/Downloads). This goes beyond the schema's simple description.

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 '保存当前文档' (save the current document) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like wps_word_new, wps_word_open, and wps_word_close. It adds specific context about the path parameter's necessity based on save history, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 clear guidance on when to include the path parameter (first save) and when it can be omitted (already saved). It also warns about the sandbox restriction and recommends ~/Downloads. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternative save-related tools like wps_word_export_pdf, so some usage context is implied rather than fully explicit.

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