style_createParagraph

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden but discloses nothing beyond 'create'. It does not say whether it requires an open document, how name collisions are handled, whether the style is auto-applied, or that it is a mutating operation. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is a significant gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no padding, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise, earning neutrality.

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 complex 11-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, a one-line description is far too thin. The agent lacks the behavioral and parameter context needed to 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 only 9% (just document_id), and there are 11 parameters, yet the description names none of them. Fields like basedOn, leading, pointSize, and spaceBefore/spaceAfter are undocumented anywhere, so the description fails to compensate for the schema 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?

States a specific verb + resource ('Create a new paragraph style') that is unambiguous, and the 'paragraph' qualifier implicitly distinguishes it from style_createCharacter. However, it does not explicitly contrast with that sibling or with style_duplicate, leaving the differentiation to be inferred from the name alone.

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 provides no when-to-use context, no prerequisites (e.g., an open document), and no mention of alternatives like style_duplicate or style_listParagraph. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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