get_selected_pos_by_set

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get' strongly implies a read-only operation and identifies the target as the current selection, but it does not say what happens when no selection exists or whether any state changes occur. For a simple getter, this is minimally serviceable but not richly transparent.

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 compact and front-loaded: the purpose sentence appears first, and the parameter note is a single useful line. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

For a one-parameter, read-oriented tool with an output schema, the description provides enough information to locate the document and understand the operation. The main omission is usage differentiation among sibling tools, but that gap is already reflected in the usage_guidelines dimension.

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 only says doc_id is a required string, so the description's note that it is the Document ID from open_document adds the essential semantic context. Since there is only one parameter, this fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and an explicit target ('selected range start and end positions'), so the core function is immediately identifiable. It does not explicitly differentiate from close siblings like get_pos_by_set or get_selection_info, but the phrase 'selected range' provides reasonable scoping.

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?

There is no guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_pos_by_set or get_selection_info. The only contextual hint is that doc_id comes from open_document, and the selection prerequisite is merely implied by the word 'selected' rather than stated.

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