hwp_foreground_preview_profile_insert

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does a good job: it discloses server-side resolution, exclusion from the MCP response, experimental status, and lack of automatic read-back or Undo. It does not clarify whether the preview mutates the document or how conflicts are handled, but the disclosed caveats are meaningful.

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?

Three short sentences with no padding. The primary action is front-loaded, followed by a privacy note and an experimental caveat, with every sentence earning its place.

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 description is reasonably complete for an experimental preview tool and an output schema exists, but four required parameters remain under-explained and no guidance distinguishes this from sibling preview tools. The invocation semantics are not fully recoverable from the description alone.

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 for the schema's silence. It only vaguely references a 'profile value' and 'user-confirmed foreground caret', leaving expected_revision, the exact boolean semantics of user_confirms_collapsed_caret, and the relationship between profile_id and key unexplained.

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 identifies a specific action ('Preview a local profile value') and a precise context ('user-confirmed foreground caret'). It is clear enough to be recognized as distinct from generic preview tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling hwp_preview_profile_insert.

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 intended use case is implied: previewing a local profile value at a foreground caret after user confirmation. However, the description does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over hwp_preview_profile_insert or hwp_foreground_preview_text, and no exclusion criteria are given.

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