word_list_anchors

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

Annotations already mark the tool as readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's safe. The description adds that it returns 'headings plus high-signal non-empty paragraphs', but does not explain what 'high-signal' means or detail any other behavioral traits. This adds some value beyond annotations but is not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that immediately state the purpose and output usage. No redundant information, and it is front-loaded with the key action.

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 description explains the purpose and output usage, but lacks details on return format, the meaning of 'high-signal', and parameter descriptions. Given its simplicity as a read-only list tool, it covers the essential context but could be more complete.

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%, meaning the description does not explain any of the three parameters (file_path, query, include_paragraphs). The description only mentions that the tool lists anchors, but does not connect that to the parameters. This is a significant gap for parameter understanding.

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 explicitly states it lists 'anchor paragraphs and headings' for 'insertion workflows', and mentions it can be used with `word_insert_at_anchor`. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like word_insert_at_anchor (which inserts, not lists) and other word_* 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?

The description indicates the tool is for insertion workflows and its output is for use with `word_insert_at_anchor`, providing clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but given the sibling tools, no alternative exists for listing anchors, so it is sufficient.

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