docx_list_fields

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

The description accurately states 'Read-only,' indicating no side effects. While no annotations are present, the description does not provide additional details on error handling or performance, but it is adequate for a simple listing tool.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the key information ('Read-only. List field instructions'), with no wasted 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 the number of sibling tools and lack of output schema, the description is too minimal; it does not hint at the return format or how the list is presented, leaving the agent without sufficient context for correct usage.

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 does not mention the parameters 'docx_path' or 'max_preview' at all, leaving the agent without any guidance beyond 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 explicitly states 'List field instructions' and provides concrete examples (TOC, REF, PAGEREF, SEQ), making the tool's purpose clear and distinguishing it from sibling tools like docx_list_parts or docx_list_headings.

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 labels the tool as 'Read-only,' implying it is safe for inspection without modification. However, it does not explicitly specify when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., docx_inspect) or provide exclusions.

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