extract_template_structure

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently lists the extracted elements (paragraphs and tables with their properties), implying a read-only operation. However, it does not discuss permissions, rate limits, performance, or any other behavioral traits beyond the output content.

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 efficient sentences: the first states what the tool extracts, and the second advises on when to use it. Every word adds value with no redundancy or wasted space.

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?

Though the tool has an output schema (covering return structure), the description adequately outlines the extracted content. However, it omits documentation for the single parameter, and lacks context on how this tool compares to similar siblings or any prerequisites. This gap reduces completeness.

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 only parameter, 'document_handle,' is not described in either the schema or the tool description. With schema coverage at 0%, the description must explain the parameter but fails to do so, leaving its meaning and default behavior ambiguous.

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 uses a specific verb 'Extract' with resource 'full structure' detailing 'all paragraphs (index, style, text, paraId) and tables (index, dimensions, cell content)'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_all_paragraphs and get_tables by offering a comprehensive extraction, and it ties directly to a use case: mapping a template before filling.

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 states 'Use to map a template before filling it,' providing a clear context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives among siblings, but the primary use case is well-defined.

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