hwp_navigate_cell

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully discloses behavior: moves cursor to adjacent cell, errors if outside table, and direction options. It is sufficient for a simple navigation tool, though it could mention behavior with merged cells (but not necessary).

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 short sentences plus a workflow example. Every sentence adds value: purpose, error condition, direction list, and usage hint. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, constraints, directions, and example usage. It is complete and leaves no major gaps.

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 covers 100% of parameters with enum and description. The description adds context beyond the schema (error if outside table, version info), which enhances understanding. Since schema already documents the parameter well, the additional context warrants a 4.

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 moves the cursor to an adjacent cell within a table, lists four directions (left/right/upper/lower), and notes that it errors if the cursor is outside a table. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like hwp_enter_table or hwp_insert_row_at_cursor.

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?

Explicitly states usage context (inside a table) and error condition (outside table). Provides a practical workflow example: use hwp_list_controls to locate table, enter, navigate with this tool, then use insert_row_at_cursor. This guides when and how to use it.

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