set_character_spacing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that spacing_pt positive expands and negative condenses spacing, which is key behavior. It does not mention side effects or error cases, but the tool is simple enough that this is acceptable.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and uses a clear Args section. Every sentence adds value without waste.

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 need not be described. The description provides sufficient context for a simple single-action tool. It covers the action, all parameters, and the resource. Minor missing context: no guidance on prerequisites (e.g., ensure run exists).

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%, but the description adds meaning for all three parameters: explains para_id, specifies run_idx is zero-based, and clarifies spacing_pt meaning (positive=expanded, negative=condensed). This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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's action (set), resource (character spacing/tracking), and scope (for a specific run in a paragraph). It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying it's for character spacing, not other run formatting (e.g., font, size, color).

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 set_run_font or set_character_position. It implies usage through parameter descriptions but lacks guidance on when not to use it or what to do before/after.

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