docx-queryObjects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must describe behavioral traits. It only indicates a read operation via 'List' but does not disclose any other behaviors such as side effects, authorization needs, error conditions, or output structure. The description is insufficient for an agent to know what happens when invoked.

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 extremely concise at 4 words, which is front-loaded and efficient. However, it sacrifices necessary detail, making it under-specified for a tool that likely requires more context about its behavior and output.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, but the description fails to specify what 'object info' includes or what the return value looks like. Given the lack of annotations and schema coverage, the description is not complete enough for an agent to reliably use the tool without additional knowledge.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and no parameter descriptions, the description must explain the 'id' parameter. However, it only mentions 'by id' in the description without clarifying the expected format, type constraints, or what the id represents. The agent gets no additional meaning beyond the schema's bare 'string' type.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource 'top-level object info' with a key parameter 'by id'. It clearly states the tool's function, but lacks detail on what constitutes 'top-level object info', which could be clearer. It differentiates from siblings like 'docx-queryMeta' and 'docx-getSchema' by focusing on objects rather than metadata or schema.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the numerous sibling tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or alternatives. The agent receives no help in deciding between, e.g., 'docx-queryObjects' and 'docx-queryMeta'.

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