hwp_table_add_column

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral details such as side effects (e.g., does the column appear at the end?), required permissions, or constraints like whether the table must have data. The description is too terse to ensure safe invocation.

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 a single sentence and is front-loaded with the action. However, it is overly brief for a table manipulation tool, lacking necessary details that could be added without becoming verbose.

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 table operations and the large number of sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, behavior when table_index is invalid, or how it interacts with other table states. No output schema compensates.

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 the single parameter table_index having a minimal description ('표 인덱스'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation for high coverage.

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 accurately specifies the action (추가합니다, adds), resource (표, table), and insertion position (현재 열 오른쪽, right of current column). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like hwp_table_add_row (add row) and hwp_table_delete_column (delete column).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., table selection), and no conditions for avoiding use. The description only states the basic function without context for decision-making.

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