hwp_insert_textbox

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral aspects. It only states creation and parameter roles, but does not disclose side effects, insertion location (current page? layer?), or whether it replaces existing content.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words, front-loaded with purpose and quick usage hint. Perfectly concise.

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 no annotations and no output schema, description covers basic purpose and parameters but lacks integration of defaults (e.g., border default true) and could mention that textbox is page-relative or affects document flow. Adequate for a simple tool but not thorough.

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 100% with well-documented parameters. Description adds little beyond 'use x/y for position, width/height for size', which is already evident from schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it creates a textbox, specifies positioning and sizing parameters, and gives a concrete use case (approval stamps). Among many sibling insertion tools, it distinguishes itself by focusing on positioned textboxes.

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?

Description mentions when to use ('elements requiring position specification like approval stamps'), but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like insert_text (for inline text) or other tools. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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