get_textbox

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses return structure, edge cases (tablix-cell textboxes with None dimensions), coercion behavior ('0in' default), and the fact that empty branches are dropped. It does not mention permissions or side effects, but these are minimal for a read operation.

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 dense paragraph that front-loads the main purpose and packs detailed behavioral information efficiently. It could be improved with bullet points, but it is concise relative to the information provided.

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 no output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return value structure, including nested style dict and per-run styles, and addresses edge cases. It is sufficient for understanding the output, though error scenarios are not mentioned.

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 has two required parameters (name, path) with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description mentions 'named Textbox' but does not explain what 'name' or 'path' represent or their expected format. This leaves ambiguity for the AI agent.

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 it returns the effective state of a named Textbox, listing specific properties (position, size, Visibility, CanGrow, CanShrink, style dict). It distinguishes from siblings like find_textbox_by_value by focusing on a single named textbox's full state.

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 when to use (to get a textbox's state) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools. It provides context (searches entire report) but lacks explicit guidelines.

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