word_session_preview_patchset

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

The description explicitly states the tool is read-only and does not modify the document, which is critical behavioral information. However, with no annotations provided, it lacks details on what 'validate and preview' entails (e.g., return value, UI interaction, or side effects like displaying a prompt).

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 concise (one sentence plus 'Read-only' prefix) and front-loaded with the key behavior. Every word adds value, though it could be slightly improved by briefly noting the output or side effects.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return value, the preview mechanism, or how to interpret the result. Agents would need external knowledge to use this tool effectively.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for all 4 parameters, the description provides no explanation of what 'wait', 'session_id', 'timeout_seconds', or 'patchset' mean. This leaves the agent guessing about parameter semantics beyond their types and defaults.

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's purpose: to validate and preview a PatchSet without modifying the document. It specifies the 'read-only' nature and the target (Office.js taskpane). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'docx_apply_patchset' which modify the document.

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 use for non-destructive preview before application, but does not explicitly mention when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives like 'docx_dry_run_patchset' or 'word_session_apply_patchset'. No usage context 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.