docx_plan_patchset

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

States 'Read-only' implying no mutation, but with no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. Missing details on whether the tool requires file locks, network access, or has side effects beyond reading. Information about return format or error conditions is absent.

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?

At two sentences, it is concise, but the lack of substantive content makes it under-specified rather than efficiently informative. Every word does not earn its place because the description fails to convey actionable information.

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?

With 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the tool's purpose, inputs, outputs, or behavior, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use it 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 0%. The description only mentions 'Defaults to the .NET Open XML backend when available' for the engine parameter. No explanation of docx_path or patchset parameters, leaving the agent without guidance on required inputs or format expectations.

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?

Description says 'Read-only. Alias-grade PatchSet planning assessment' but fails to define what a PatchSet planning assessment is or how it differs from sibling tools like docx_assess_patchset or docx_preflight_patchset. The term 'Alias-grade' is ambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as docx_assess_patchset or docx_preflight_patchset. The description merely notes a default backend preference, which does not help an agent decide between tools.

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