word_add_diagram

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds valuable context about automatic conversion to image and insertion. This clarifies the side effect of adding content to the document, which is not fully captured by the annotations alone.

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, compact sentence in Chinese that conveys both the action and the key behavior (auto-conversion). No wasted words; it is perfectly concise 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool and the absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the core functionality. It doesn't explain return values, but that is unnecessary for a content-insertion tool. The mention of automatic conversion to image covers the key behavioral aspect.

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?

The input schema already describes all 5 parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: adding a Mermaid flowchart/architecture diagram that is automatically converted to an image and inserted. It uses a specific verb (add) and resource (Mermaid diagram), distinguishing it from sibling tools like word_add_code or word_add_paragraph.

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 implies the tool is used when you need to insert a Mermaid diagram as an image, and distinguishes it from code insertion by noting the automatic conversion. It gives clear context for when to use it, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion scenarios.

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