get_paragraph_format

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It explicitly uses 'Read' and describes return content, making it clear this is a read-only operation with no side effects. However, it does not mention potential latency or authorization requirements.

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 extremely concise: two sentences in the main body plus a one-line argument description. It is front-loaded with the purpose and avoids extraneous detail. Every word serves a purpose.

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 parameter) and the existence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description adequately covers what the tool does and what it returns. The listing of formatting attributes gives a complete picture of the output.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning: 'para_id: paraId of the target paragraph.' This explains the parameter's role beyond the schema's minimal 'Para Id' title. For a single required parameter, this provides sufficient guidance.

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 'Read all formatting attributes of a paragraph' and lists the specific attributes (style, alignment, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_paragraph' (which likely returns text) and the various 'set_*' formatting tools.

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 implies usage when paragraph formatting details are needed, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_paragraph' or individual formatting getters. No 'when not to use' or exclusionary criteria are provided.

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