list_styles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool lists styles (read-only operation) and explains why the list is needed (variability). While it doesn't explicitly declare non-destructive or idempotent, the nature of listing is clear. Some mention of return format could improve transparency.

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 short and to the point, with the main action in the first sentence. It uses bullet-like enumeration for families and integrates usage guidance efficiently. No unnecessary words.

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 two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, when to use it, and parameter details. It doesn't mention ordering or categorization of the list, but that is minor. Overall, it provides enough context for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 0%, so description compensates. It explains the 'family' parameter with list of valid values and its default. 'doc_id' is required but obvious; no further explanation needed. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by connecting parameters to the tool's purpose.

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 lists style names for a given family. It specifies the verb 'List', the resource 'style names available in a document', and the parameter 'family'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like insert_text and set_paragraph_style by indicating it is a preparatory step.

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 says 'Use this before calling insert_text(style=...)/char_style=.../set_paragraph_style to find valid names instead of guessing.' It provides strong guidance on when to use the tool and why (variability by version, locale, custom styles). It also enumerates valid values for 'family'.

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