insert_floating_image

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

The description discloses the image is anchored and provides wrap styles, but omits important behavioral details such as the requirement for a paragraph ID (para_id) as anchor, coordinate system, and what happens on insertion. Given no annotations, more transparency is needed.

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, using one sentence and a wrap specification. However, it lacks structure (e.g., bullet points or parameter list) and could be more scannable while remaining brief.

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 7 parameters, 4 required, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description fails to provide sufficient context for correct invocation. It does not explain output or parameter roles, leaving agents underinformed.

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?

Only the 'wrap' parameter is partially explained with valid values. The remaining six parameters (para_id, image_path, width_cm, height_cm, h_pos, v_pos) are not described, leaving significant gaps despite 0% schema coverage.

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 floating (anchored) image, distinguishing it from inline image insertion tools like 'insert_image'. It also lists wrap options, making the purpose explicit.

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 use for floating images by specifying 'floating (anchored)' but does not explicitly compare to alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. It offers wrap choices but no context for selection.

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