docx_export_table_csv

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

The description discloses that the tool does not modify the DOCX and writes a sidecar, but fails to mention error handling, permissions, or sidecar overwrite behavior. With no annotations, more behavioral detail is needed for full 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 two crisp sentences with no wasted words. Key constraints (write-sidecar, non-destructive) are front-loaded, making it easy to parse.

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 tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not address return values, error scenarios, or parameter dependencies. The presence of similar sibling tools increases the need for completeness.

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%, and the description only partially mentions out_path being optional. It does not explain docx_path, table_index, or scope_tag, leaving their meaning and constraints entirely to the schema.

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 exports a table to CSV without modifying the DOCX, using 'Write-sidecar only'. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool docx_table_to_csv, which may have similar functionality, reducing clarity.

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 implies usage via 'Write-sidecar only' and mentions default sidecar naming, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as docx_table_to_csv. No prerequisites or exclusions are provided.

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