insert_paragraph

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'insert' implies a write operation, it doesn't disclose permissions needed, whether changes are saved automatically, what happens if no document is open, or error conditions. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 a single, efficient sentence in Korean that directly states the tool's purpose with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential information.

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?

For a mutation tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how errors are handled, or provide sufficient context about the parameters and their effects on document structure.

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 only 33% (only the 'text' parameter has a description). The tool description adds no parameter information beyond what's in the schema. With low schema coverage, the description fails to compensate by explaining what 'char_pr_id' or 'section_index' mean or how they affect paragraph insertion.

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 ('insert paragraph') and target ('currently open document'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'insert_image' or 'insert_table' that also insert content into documents, missing sibling differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'insert_image' or 'insert_table'. It mentions 'currently open document' which implies a prerequisite (a document must be open), but offers no explicit when/when-not instructions or named alternatives.

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