delete_paragraphs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full weight, and it is unusually thorough: it discloses inclusive range semantics, the empty-paragraph fallback, tracked-deletion behavior, backup slots, atomic validated saves, and live editing of documents open in Word. Nothing contradicts the missing annotations.

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 core operation is front-loaded and every clause carries information, but the sentence is dense with caveats (backup slots, atomic save, live editing), making it efficient rather than crisp. It earns its length, though it could be broken into bullets for readability.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and an output schema, the description covers the important edge cases and side effects well. The main missing context is full clarification of the 'live' parameter and how file mode is selected, but overall an agent can call it correctly.

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, and largely does: start/end inclusivity and default, track+author behavior, and backup=False semantics are all explained beyond the bare schema. file_path and the 'live' parameter are not given the same explicit treatment, leaving a small gap.

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 opens with 'Delete body paragraphs start..end' – a specific verb, target resource, and exact range semantics. This distinguishes it from paragraph-adjacent siblings like replace_paragraph_text and from delete_source/delete_columns/delete_rows.

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 deletion semantics and refusal conditions ('Refuses ranges that cut through a field or carry a section break') give clear context, but no alternative tools are named or recommended. When-to-use vs siblings is only implied by the phrase 'body paragraphs.'

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