add_table

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

The description lacks disclosure of important behaviors: it does not confirm whether the input file is modified (it says 'new file', but the verb 'append' implies modification), does not mention overwrite behavior, permissions, or size limits. The phrase 'python-hwpx delegate' is cryptic and offers no behavioral clarity.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it sacrifices necessary detail. It front-loads the action but lacks structure to convey parameter roles or usage context.

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?

Given 4 required parameters with no schema descriptions, an output schema exists but is not referenced, and many sibling tools for similar tasks, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what each parameter does, what the tool returns, or how it differs from alternatives.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters, but it only hints at rows and cols ('rows x cols') and completely omits explanation of path (input file?) and out_path (output file?). The agent must infer semantics without sufficient context.

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 uses specific verb-resource pairs 'Append a rows x cols table' and 'write a NEW file', clearly indicating the tool adds a table and saves to a new file. However, it doesn't explicitly state that it appends to an existing document (via path) and whether the table is placed at the end or elsewhere, leaving some ambiguity.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like create_hwpx_table or add_image. There is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or conditions for use, making it hard for an agent to decide correctly.

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