get_paragraph_format

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

The description indicates a read operation ('Read') and lists the specific attributes returned, which is transparent. However, it does not discuss what happens if para_id is invalid, permissions needed, or any side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it omits important behavioral details like error handling or scope.

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 concise: one sentence summarizing the action and output, a bullet-like list of returned attributes, and a parameter explanation. No unnecessary words; it is front-loaded and efficient.

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 that an output schema exists (although not shown), the description appropriately lists the returned attributes. It covers the tool's purpose and inputs. However, it could mention that the tool is read-only and does not modify the document. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand usage.

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 input schema has only 'para_id' with no description, so the description's 'para_id: paraId of the target paragraph' adds meaningful context beyond the schema. It clarifies the parameter's purpose, though it could be more detailed about format or how to obtain para_id.

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 specifies the verb 'Read' and the resource 'all formatting attributes of a paragraph', and enumerates what is returned (style, alignment, etc.). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_paragraph' (which likely returns text) and 'get_style' (which returns style definitions).

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 states what the tool does but does not explicitly guide when to use it versus alternatives. There is no mention of 'use this when you need formatting; use get_paragraph for text content' or similar exclusions. The usage context is implied but not clarified.

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