docx_process

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions that behavior depends on the 'route' parameter but gives no details about side effects, idempotency, authorization, error handling, or output behavior. This leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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, with a prominent warning first, followed by a brief explanation and parameter list. Every sentence adds value. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

Despite having an output schema (from context signals), the description does not explain return values or behavior per route. It also lacks details about error cases and validation. For a gateway tool with nested params, more context is needed.

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 must compensate. It explains that 'route' is the operation name with examples, and 'params' is the operation-specific parameters, referencing skill documentation. This adds value beyond the schema but is not fully self-contained.

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 it is a 'Word document processing gateway' and mentions example routes like 'create_document', 'add_paragraph', 'search_text'. This makes the purpose specific and clear. However, there are no sibling tools to differentiate from, so it does not need to distinguish.

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 explicitly instructs that the 'docx-process' skill must be loaded first before calling this tool. This provides a crucial usage guideline. It does not include when-not-to-use or alternatives, but no siblings exist.

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