word_list_paragraphs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It mentions return format and error conditions (ERR_FILE_NOT_FOUND, ERR_UNSUPPORTED_FMT) but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, performance implications, or other behavioral traits. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 with two paragraphs plus args list. Every sentence adds value: the first line states the purpose, the second details output structure, and the third lists parameters and errors. 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 tool's simplicity (list paragraphs), the presence of an output schema, and only two parameters, the description covers input, output structure, and errors completely. It is fully adequate for an agent to understand and invoke the 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It explains both parameters: 'path: Path to an existing .docx' and 'folder: Optional base folder for relative paths,' which adds valuable context beyond the schema's type-only definitions.

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: 'Return one dict per body paragraph.' It specifies the output keys (index, style, text, runs) and distinguishes from sibling tools like word_read_paragraph (single paragraph) and word_add_paragraph (adding), making it explicit that this tool lists all paragraphs.

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 usage for listing paragraphs from a .docx file but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like word_read_paragraph. No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided, making it only adequate.

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