docx.find_empty_table_rows

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. The word 'Find' plus 'for MANUAL analysis' implies a non-mutating lookup operation, but the description never explicitly states that the document is not modified. It also does not clarify what qualifies as an 'empty row' or whether the result includes row indices, cell contents, or everything.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and adds a clarifying purpose, making it appropriately sized for a simple read-only tool.

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 only one parameter, no output schema, and a straightforward purpose. The description is essentially enough for an agent to decide whether to call it. Minor gaps include not describing the return shape or the specific definition of an empty row, but these are acceptable for such a simple operation.

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 100% and the only parameter, docId, is already described as 'Document ID.' The description adds no additional parameter-specific behavior, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Find all empty rows in tables.' This is distinct from sibling tools like docx.get_table_content or docx.table_edit, so an agent can tell it apart without needing to inspect each sibling's schema.

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 phrase 'for MANUAL analysis' gives an implied use case: the agent should surface results for human review rather than automatically modifying. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use this tool or which alternative to choose for deletion/editing, such as docx.remove_table_row or docx.table_edit.

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