format_table

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

No annotations are present. The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the tool modifies the document, prerequisites, side effects, or what 'composite formatting' implies.

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 short sentence, which is structurally efficient. However, it is overly concise and lacks essential detail, resulting in under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, zero schema coverage, and many sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the composite formatting concept, parameter details, or what the tool returns, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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?

The input schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names. While some names like 'border_style' and 'shading' are suggestive, the description does not clarify their format or constraints.

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 states the tool applies composite formatting to a table, which is clear but vague. It does not specify what 'composite formatting' entails, nor does it distinguish among many sibling tools related to table formatting (e.g., format_table_cell_text, apply_table_alternating_rows).

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus its siblings. With numerous table-related alternatives, the description lacks any usage context or exclusions.

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