apply_style_to_range

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the return value but omits details such as whether existing formatting is overridden, what happens if paraIds are invalid, or whether the style must exist. This lack of transparency could lead to unexpected results.

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 extremely concise: one summary line, then Args and Returns in clear sections. Every sentence is necessary and well-structured, with no superfluous content.

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's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers basic purpose, parameters, and return. However, it lacks usage guidance and behavioral details that would help an agent use it correctly, especially among 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?

The description includes an Args section that briefly explains each parameter, adding value beyond the schema (which has 0% coverage). However, the explanations are minimal and do not include constraints, examples, or allowed values (e.g., format of styleId).

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 applies a style to a list of paragraphs by paraIds. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_style or update_style by focusing on application to multiple paragraphs. However, it does not explicitly clarify that the style must already exist, which could be inferred but is not stated.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool over alternatives like set_formatting or apply_style_to_single_paragraph. There are no exclusions or context notes to guide selection.

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