hwp_generate_multi_documents

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

With no annotations, the burden is on the description. It discloses a key behavior: the template is copied into separate files for each data entry, avoiding AllReplace scope problems. However, it does not mention other behaviors like error handling, output file naming, or performance implications, leaving some gaps.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that deliver the purpose, a key behavioral detail, and a usage case. No redundancy or filler; each sentence earns its place.

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 of the tool (multiple documents, nested data) and the absence of an output schema, the description could be more complete by mentioning the return value (e.g., list of generated files) or common pitfalls. However, the combination with the schema provides adequate context for tool selection.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond what is in the schema. It mentions 'each data' and 'AllReplace' but these are implicit in the parameters.

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 generates multiple documents from a single template, with each document having its own data. It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying batch generation for multiple entities, and gives a concrete use case: 'same form with multiple people/company data'.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool ('when filling the same form with multiple people/company data') and highlights an advantage (avoiding AllReplace scope issues). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the guidance is clear and contextual.

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