add_static_column

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It details cell behavior (shorter list = blank trailing, longer = error), naming conventions, default positions and width. However, it omits mentioning required editing transactions or conflict handling.

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 five sentences, front-loaded with purpose. It is mostly concise, though it could trim phrasing like '(top to bottom)' which is implicit in row order. No unnecessary words.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers core behavior but misses context like editing session requirements, error handling, and relationship to sibling tools. It does not explain return values.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains cells (list of strings, per row, errors on longer list), position (0-indexed, default appends), and width (defaults to 1in). Three of six parameters gain meaning; path, tablix_name, column_name are left mostly implicit.

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 'Add a static (no-group) column to a tablix' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like add_calculated_field or add_tablix_column by emphasizing 'static' and 'no-group'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like add_tablix_column or add_calculated_field. It does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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