docx_list_paragraphs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but only states it is read-only. It does not disclose pagination behavior, performance implications, or whether the preview truncates content. The list of returned fields is helpful but insufficient for a complete behavioral understanding.

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 14-word sentence that front-loads the key behavioral trait ('Read-only') and lists the returned fields. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or fluff.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description should explain parameters and return format more thoroughly. It omits how include_empty affects results and does not describe the structure of the returned inventory. The tool's complexity requires more detail for a complete understanding.

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%, yet the description adds no meaning to the three parameters (docx_path, max_preview, include_empty). It mentions 'preview' in the returned data but does not clarify max_preview. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 is a read-only paragraph inventory that returns specific attributes (style, paraId, heading level, scope, preview, hash, complexity). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like docx_read_paragraph (single paragraph) or docx_list_headings (only headings), making its purpose precise and unambiguous.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While 'Read-only' implies safety, it does not explain contexts where this tool is preferred over docx_read_paragraph or docx_list_headings. Sibling tools are numerous, and the description offers no comparative rationale.

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