hwp_table_formula_sum

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'automatically calculates sum' but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it modifies the table, inserts a formula or value, or is destructive). The lack of behavioral detail is a significant gap.

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, no waste. Could be improved by adding structured details without becoming verbose. However, it is efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Despite having one parameter and no output schema, the description lacks context on return values, side effects, or usage examples. Ambiguity around 'current cell' vs table_index makes it incomplete for a formula tool that likely alters the document.

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% with the parameter 'table_index' having a Korean description. Description adds 'current cell position' but does not clarify relationship to table_index. Baseline is 3; description adds minimal value 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?

Description clearly states it calculates sum in a table using Hangul's auto sum function. It distinguishes from sibling hwp_table_formula_avg, but the phrase 'current cell position' may conflict with the table_index parameter, causing slight ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like manual sum entry or other formula tools. The description does not indicate prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context from sibling tools alone.

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