add_section_break

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions the action and break types but does not explain side effects, prerequisites (e.g., paragraph existence), or what happens if a section break already exists. Authorizations, rate limits, and other traits are omitted.

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 with a list of break types, no filler words. It is appropriately short, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate parameter explanations). Still, it earns a high score for efficiency.

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 document structure with three parameters and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain return values (though output schema exists), preconditions, or error scenarios. An agent needs more context to use this tool safely and correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should add meaning to all parameters. It only lists break_type values, lacking descriptions for para_id (required) and document_handle. The break_type values are not explained (e.g., what 'continuous' means), so the agent may not know how to choose correctly.

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 adds a section break at a paragraph, specifying the verb 'Add' and the resource 'section break'. It lists possible break types, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_section_break or add_page_break.

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 implies usage when a section break is needed at a paragraph, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It lacks comparison to alternatives like add_page_break or other break-related tools, leaving the agent to infer context.

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