hwp_set_header_footer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states 'Sets header or footer' but does not indicate whether it replaces existing headers/footers, requires an open document, or has side effects. Key behavioral details are missing given the tool's action of modifying document structure.

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 two sentences, each contributing essential information: purpose and usage context plus style capability. No unnecessary words or redundancy. Efficient and to the point.

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 modifies document content (headers/footers) and has no output schema, the description should explain behavior like replacement behavior, scope (all sections or current), and prerequisites. It lacks these details, making it incomplete for safe agent use.

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 descriptions for all parameters. The description adds minimal value by summarizing style properties (bold/alignment/size), but the schema already details these. The description does not compensate significantly beyond the schema.

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 sets headers or footers and gives usage examples (organization name, page number). While it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings, the tool's unique purpose is apparent among the sibling list, which lacks other header/footer specific tools.

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 says 'Use when inserting organization name, page number, etc.' which implies context but does not mention when not to use or provide alternatives (e.g., hwp_insert_page_num for dynamic page numbers). Usage guidance is present but not explicit.

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