create_custom_style

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'create' implies a write operation but fails to mention permissions, whether the style is reusable, error handling, or what happens on success/failure. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior and constraints.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 complexity of a creation tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover parameter meanings, behavioral traits, or expected outcomes, leaving the agent with inadequate information to use the tool effectively.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning none of the 8 parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter details beyond implying 'style' creation, failing to explain what 'filename', 'style_name', or attributes like 'bold' and 'color' represent. This insufficiently compensates for the lack of schema documentation.

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') and resource ('custom style in the document'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'customize_footnote_style' or 'format_text', which also involve style manipulation, leaving room for confusion about when to choose this specific tool.

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 like 'customize_footnote_style' or 'format_text', nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing an existing document. It lacks explicit instructions on context or exclusions, offering minimal usage direction.

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