set_run_strikethrough

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It describes the action and parameters but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether existing strikethrough is toggled, error behavior for invalid indices, or irreversibility). Minimal behavioral info beyond the basic operation.

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: a one-line summary followed by a succinct parameter list. No unnecessary words, well-structured, and front-loaded with the core 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?

The tool has 3 parameters with 2 required and an output schema exists. The description adequately explains the parameters and function. However, it lacks any mention of validation, side effects, or integration with other run formatting operations, which could be helpful given the large number of sibling tools.

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 includes an 'Args' section that explains each parameter. For 'double', it clarifies the meaning: 'False for single strikethrough, True for double strikethrough.' This adds value beyond the raw schema, though could further clarify defaults or range.

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 tool's action: 'Set strikethrough on a specific run in a paragraph.' It specifies the verb (Set) and resource (strikethrough on a run), distinguishing it from many sibling set_run_* 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., set_run_underline or other formatting). No usage context, prerequisites, or when-not-to-use instructions are included.

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