insert_sequence_field

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains that reset restarts the counter but does not disclose whether the operation is reversible, what happens if the paragraph ID is invalid, or any side effects on existing fields. This is partially transparent but leaves gaps.

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 and well-structured with an 'Args' section. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and parameters.

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 tool has an output schema, so return values are covered. The description adequately documents the three parameters, but lacks information on error conditions or prerequisites. Given the tool's moderate complexity, it is mostly complete.

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 adds meaning by explaining each parameter: para_id (target paragraph), seq_name (e.g., 'Figure'), and reset (restarts counter). However, it does not provide allowed values for seq_name or format for para_id, missing some helpful detail.

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 'Insert a SEQ (sequence) field for figure/table numbering', using a specific verb (insert) and resource (sequence field). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like insert_date_field, insert_merge_field, etc., by specifying the exact type of field.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like insert_caption or generate_list_of_figures. It implies usage for sequence numbering but lacks when-not-to-use or alternative guidance.

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