get_paragraph_range

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

No annotations provided, but the description compensates by detailing return structure, clamping behavior of indices, and conditional inclusion of comments and track changes. It discloses 0-based inclusive indexing and default for include_annotations.

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 well-structured with a brief purpose, usage context, Args, and Returns blocks. It is concise yet informative, though the Returns block is slightly detailed but justified given the tool's complexity.

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 has 4 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers parameters, return values, and usage context adequately. It could elaborate on edge cases like out-of-range indices, but the clamping mention helps. Overall, it's complete enough for agent invocation.

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 0%, but the description includes an Args block explaining each parameter: path, start_index (0-based inclusive), end_index (0-based inclusive), and include_annotations (default false). This significantly adds meaning 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 'Get a specific range of paragraphs from a Word document.' It distinguishes from sibling tools by advising use after search_document for context or to avoid loading the full document, making the purpose distinct.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: 'Use after search_document to get more context around matches, or to read a specific section without loading the full document.' While it doesn't list alternatives or when-not-to-use, the context is clear and helpful.

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