swap_table_row_col

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, but it only restates the swap operation and gives terse arg explanations. It does not say whether the operation is destructive, reversible, affects cell contents, or has constraints such as requiring a rectangular table.

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 with the one-sentence operation, followed by an Args list. No filler is present, though a bit more detail on type and swap_margin could be added without hurting clarity.

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 presence of an output schema means return values need not be described, but this is still a mutating operation with no annotations, no usage alternatives, and no side-effect disclosure. An agent is not given enough context to know when to invoke it or what consequences to expect.

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%, so the description must compensate. It briefly explains all three parameters: doc_id provenance, type's row↔col meaning, and swap_margin's purpose. However, type's valid values and the exact expected form for swap_margin remain ambiguous.

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 the operation clearly: 'Swap table rows and columns' and the arg text '0=row↔col' reinforces that this is a transpose operation. It is specific about verb and resource, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling table manipulation tools.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_table_row, delete_table_row, or table_to_text. The only contextual hint is that doc_id comes from open_document, but there is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use rationale.

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