set_run_highlight

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without detailing side effects, error handling for invalid colors, or whether it overwrites existing highlights. The example 'none' hints at removal but is not explicit.

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 front-loaded. The title line immediately states the purpose, followed by a clean Args block with each parameter on its own line. Every sentence is necessary and adds value.

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 existence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values. However, for a mutation tool, it could mention error conditions like invalid para_id or run_idx. The description is minimally adequate but lacks completeness.

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%, so the description bears full burden. It adds meaning to all three parameters: specifies para_id as 'paraId of the target paragraph', run_idx as 'Zero-based index', and color as 'Word highlight color name' with examples, compensating well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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: 'Set highlight color of a specific run in a paragraph.' It uses specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like set_run_color which deals with font 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 provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. It lacks context such as prerequisites or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer from the parameter list.

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