wps_word_toggle_track_changes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that enabling records subsequent edits as revisions and mentions related tools. However, it does not address idempotency (what happens if already enabled/disabled), permissions, or whether the effect is document-wide. The description is adequate for a simple toggle but lacks some behavioral detail.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first sentence directly states the purpose, and the second explains the effect and links to related tools. Every word is meaningful; no wasted space. Front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 simple boolean toggle tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the action, the effect, and downstream tools. It could optionally mention the return value (e.g., success/failure) or error conditions, but these are not essential for correct usage. The description provides sufficient context for an agent to use this 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a single boolean parameter described in the schema. The tool description restates the parameter's purpose (enable/disable) but adds no additional semantics beyond the schema. It does not explain default behavior, error cases, or edge cases for the parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 verb 'toggle' (开启/关闭) and resource 'track changes mode'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly mentioning related tools for viewing and resolving revisions, making the tool's role in the workflow clear.

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 explains when to use this tool (to enable/disable track changes) and what happens after enabling (edits recorded as revisions). It references sibling tools for viewing and resolving revisions, providing guidance on subsequent steps. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or alternative approaches, though for a simple toggle such exclusions are not critical.

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