apply_continuous_numbering

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the tool modifies the document (converts text to numbered lists) and states idempotency. However, it omits details about permissions required, effect on existing formatting, or behavior with non-standard prefixes.

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 sentence plus an idempotency note, which is concise and front-loaded. It avoids unnecessary words but could be slightly more structured with separate sections for parameters and behavior.

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 modifies documents and has an output schema (unspecified), the description provides enough context for basic usage but lacks details on handling edge cases like existing numbered lists, mixed content, or error scenarios. The mention of 'prompt paragraphs' and 'sub-bullet lists' adds useful specificity.

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 description does not explain any parameters. The schema covers 75% of parameters with descriptions, but user_google_email lacks a description. The tool description adds no value beyond the schema, failing to clarify the required email parameter or the effect of strip_plain_text.

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 converts plain-text 'N. ' step prefixes into a real numbered list with continuous numbering. It specifies the resource (Google Doc or specific tab) and distinguishes this from sibling tools like modify_doc_text or update_paragraph_style.

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 notes idempotency and safety for re-running, providing some guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., when to use apply_continuous_numbering vs modify_doc_text for list formatting).

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