convert_md_to_hwpx

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool's output behavior in useful detail: 'Generates a complete document with cover page, page headers/footers, heading auto-numbering, native tables, code blocks, lists, and blockquotes.' It does not cover error handling or overwrite behavior, but the core transformation behavior is well described.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line primary purpose, a usage condition, and a list of generated content features. Every sentence adds value, and key information is 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?

Given the presence of an output schema, full parameter schema coverage, and a clear usage scenario, the description is largely complete. It could additionally mention expected prerequisites (e.g., input file existence, output directory writability) but is sufficient for most agents to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents all five parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what is in the schema, placing it at the baseline of 3.

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 tool converts a Markdown file to HWPX format, using a specific verb ('Convert') and resource ('Markdown file' → 'HWPX'). It also differentiates from siblings by explicitly noting it handles the case where no reference HWPX template is provided.

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 states when to use ('when the user wants to create an HWPX document from a Markdown file WITHOUT providing a reference HWPX template'), including a clear when-not condition. However, it does not name any alternative sibling tool, so it stops short of full alternative guidance.

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