delete_section_break

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

No annotations provided, but the description discloses key behavioral traits: it raises ValueError if the paragraph has no section break, and it explains that after removal, the paragraph's content flows into the next section. This goes beyond merely stating the action.

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 two sentences with a clearly structured Args/Raises section. Every sentence adds value, starting with the core purpose and then detailing behavior. No wasted words.

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?

For a simple one-parameter deletion tool, the description adequately covers purpose, parameter, error condition, and behavioral outcome. It does not explain the return value, but an output schema exists, so this is acceptable.

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 fully compensates by explaining that para_id is the 'paraId of the paragraph that holds the section break,' adding essential meaning beyond the schema's title.

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?

Description clearly states 'Remove a section break from a paragraph' and explains the underlying XML operation (removes w:sectPr from w:pPr). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_section_break or set_section_properties by focusing on removal.

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 you need to remove a section break but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. It lacks guidance on when not to use it (e.g., if no section break exists) but covers that via the ValueError raise.

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