create_multilevel_list

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

Without annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It mentions the target file ('numbering.xml') but does not disclose important behaviors like whether it overwrites existing lists, requires document save, or has authorization needs. The format of the level dict is given but not explained (e.g., valid values for num_fmt, units for indent), leaving behavioral gaps.

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 exceptionally concise: two sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the purpose and immediately provides the critical dict format for levels. Every word 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?

While the description covers the basic purpose and level structure, it lacks context about return values (despite having an output schema), error conditions, and relationships to sibling tools. Given the tool's complexity (array of objects parameter) and the surrounding list-related tools, more completeness is needed for confident invocation.

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 lacks descriptions for both parameters (0% coverage). The description adds meaning by detailing the expected keys for the levels array elements (num_fmt, lvl_text, indent, hanging, style?), which partially compensates. However, the name parameter remains unexplained, and the specifics of each key (e.g., data types, valid values) are omitted.

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 ('Create a multilevel list') and the resource ('in numbering.xml'), distinguishing it from generic list tools like add_list. It also specifies the structure for each level, making the purpose specific and 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives like add_list, demote_list_item, or promote_list_item. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring an open document, or whether this tool should be used for creating new lists vs. modifying existing ones.

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