get_custom_properties

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states a read operation but does not mention behavior when 'custom.xml' is missing or empty, error conditions, or return format beyond what the output schema likely covers. Minimal insight into side effects or edge cases.

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 that conveys the essential information without redundancy. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema shown but present), the description is largely complete. It could mention that it returns all custom properties or behavior on missing data, but overall sufficient for a straightforward retrieval.

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 tool has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate for no-parameter tools.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('custom document properties'), and the location ('from docProps/custom.xml'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_properties' (standard properties) and 'get_document_info' (general metadata).

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 for reading custom properties but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_custom_property' or 'delete_custom_property'. No context about prerequisites or when not to use it.

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