generate_tot

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It omits important details such as what happens if 'para_id' is missing, whether existing Tables of Tables are updated, or if the operation is reversible. The mutation nature is implied but not clarified.

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 with two sentences that convey the core functionality without any extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the action and then additional detail.

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 description lacks completeness for a tool that manipulates document structure. It does not mention the return value (though output schema exists), error conditions, or the behavior when no captions are found. Significant gaps remain.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It explains 'para_id' placement but completely ignores the 'title' parameter, leaving its purpose ambiguous. The coverage is insufficient.

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 inserts a Table of Tables field block after a specified paragraph and collects caption-styled paragraphs starting with 'Table'. It uses specific verbs and resources, and the scope is well-defined, distinguishing it from generic field insertion tools.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'generate_list_of_tables'. There are no usage exclusions or context clues to help the agent decide between similar tools.

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