insert_caption_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses auto-backup behavior, the effect of backup=False, atomic validated save, and the refusal to operate on documents open in Word. These are meaningful behavioral traits that an agent would not otherwise know, though it does not explain behaviors around at_start, after_index, or update_on_open.

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: purpose, then defaults, then backup behavior, then a critical constraint. Each sentence carries distinct useful information and there is no filler or repetition.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema and a concise description, the tool has 7 parameters and no annotations. The description leaves key behaviors such as at_start, after_index, and update_on_open unexplained, which is a significant gap for correct invocation. While the output schema reduces the need to document return values, the invocation semantics are incomplete.

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 for the lack of parameter documentation. It covers label ('Table | Figure | Equation'), the default title pattern, and backup semantics partially. However, it does not explain file_path, at_start, after_index, or update_on_open, leaving 4 of 7 parameters without meaningful guidance.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Insert a List of Tables/Figures/Equations'. It further distinguishes itself by specifying that the list is 'built from add_caption SEQ entries', which sets it apart from related tools like add_caption or insert_toc. The label options are also enumerated, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 phrase 'built from add_caption SEQ entries' implies that this tool is for after captions have been added, providing some usage context. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives like insert_toc or add_caption, and no exclusions beyond refusing documents open in Word.

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