set_column_width

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing potential side effects like range validation for width_cm or index bounds. The lack of details on error behavior or idempotency limits transparency.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action. However, it could be expanded with parameter details without losing brevity, given the many sibling tools.

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?

An output schema exists (not shown), so return values are covered. The description lacks explicit mention that it modifies the current open document's table. Among sibling table tools, context is implied but not stated for a new agent.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description fails to explain any of the three required parameters (table_index, col_index, width_cm). It does not clarify indexing (zero-based vs. one-based) or expected units for width_cm.

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 clearly states the action ('Set width') and the resource ('specific column across all rows'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like set_row_height (row height) and set_cell_padding (cell padding) by specifying the column scope.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_column_width for individual rows or set_table_borders. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., document must be open with a table) or exclusions.

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