add_table

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions 'tracked insertion,' which hints at behavior, but it does not disclose what happens if the paragraph is missing, whether the operation is reversible, or how changes affect the document structure. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 no wasted words. However, its brevity comes at the cost of missing critical information (parameter clarification, usage guidance). It is concise but not optimally informative.

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 lack of parameter descriptions, missing output schema details, and no annotations, the description is significantly incomplete. It does not address prerequisites, return value, or error scenarios, leaving large gaps for a tool with 5 parameters and many sibling tools.

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%, yet the description provides no explanation for any of the 5 parameters (para_id, rows, cols, author, document_handle). The agent must infer that 'after a paragraph' relates to para_id but gets no clues about rows, cols, or the optional parameters. This adds no value beyond the raw schema.

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 action ('Insert a new table') and specifies the location ('after a paragraph') and mode ('with tracked insertion'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like add_table_row or modify_cell, missing the opportunity to prevent confusion.

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 the tool is used when a new table is needed after a paragraph, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., add_table_row for adding rows to an existing table). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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