word_add_heading

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool appends (not inserts) a heading, returns an index, and raises specific errors. While it does not detail save behavior or permissions, it provides enough behavioral context for a simple append operation.

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 and well-structured with clear sections for Args, Returns, and Raises. Every sentence adds value; no redundant or verbose content.

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 tool has 4 parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, return value, and common errors. It does not mention whether the heading is appended at the end of the document or before other content, but 'append' implies end. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for this tool.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explains each parameter: path (existing .docx), text (heading text), level (1..9 with error handling), and folder (optional base). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema titles, compensating for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 appends a heading paragraph at a given level (1..9) to a .docx file. The verb 'append' and resource 'heading paragraph' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like word_add_paragraph (which adds normal paragraphs) and word_add_header (which adds headers to sections).

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 specifies valid level range and error conditions (ERR_INVALID_PARAMS, ERR_FILE_NOT_FOUND, ERR_UNSUPPORTED_FMT), which guides proper usage. However, it does not explicitly contrast with similar sibling tools like word_add_paragraph, leaving the agent to infer when to use headings vs normal paragraphs.

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