set_table_column_widths

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It implies a mutation ('Set'), but doesn't disclose whether this operation is destructive, requires specific permissions, or has side effects (e.g., affecting document layout). No information about error conditions, validation of widths, or response format is included.

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 front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly despite its brevity.

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?

For a mutation tool with 4 parameters (3 required), 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It lacks essential context about parameter meanings, behavioral expectations, error handling, and relationship to sibling tools, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to infer.

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%, so the description must compensate but fails to do so. It mentions 'multiple table columns' which hints at the 'widths' array parameter, but doesn't explain 'filename', 'table_index', or 'width_type' (despite its default value). No details about width units, array format, or table indexing are provided.

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 ('Set') and target resource ('widths of multiple table columns'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from sibling 'set_table_column_width' (singular) by specifying 'multiple' columns, though it doesn't fully differentiate from other table formatting tools like 'format_table' or 'auto_fit_table_columns'.

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 versus alternatives like 'set_table_column_width' (singular), 'auto_fit_table_columns', or 'format_table'. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., document must exist, table must be present) or typical scenarios for applying column width adjustments.

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