docx.fix_paragraph_rtl

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It implies mutation with 'Fix' and adds a caution, but it does not state that the document is being modified, whether the change is persisted, whether it can be undone, or what side effects the action has on the docx state.

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 compact, specific, and front-loaded with the action and the important manual-check condition. There is no redundant detail or repetition of schema contents.

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 is a simple setter with a complete input schema, but the operation mutates document state and the description does not explain persistence or side effects. With no annotations and no output schema, important behavioral context is missing for an AI agent deciding how to invoke this tool safely.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents docId, paragraphIndex, and setLTR and even explains that true means LTR and false means RTL. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the schema baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Fix RTL direction of paragraph.' It tells an agent what the tool does and differentiates it from other document tools because no sibling tool addresses RTL paragraph direction. The added 'USE ONLY after manual check' further tightens its purpose.

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 instruction 'USE ONLY after manual check' provides a clear usage gate: the tool should not be invoked until a human has verified the paragraph direction. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the conditional is strong and actionable.

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