word_delete_table_paragraphs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only states the action 'delete' without disclosing side effects, such as track_changes behavior (default true per schema), what happens to empty cells, or whether the operation is reversible. This is minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 and scope. Every word earns its place, with 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?

As a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the track_changes default, the effect on document structure, or any return value. The user lacks enough context to safely invoke this tool.

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 100%, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds 'by paraId', which reinforces the para_ids parameter but is largely redundant with the schema's description. No additional meaning is provided beyond the schema.

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 'Delete paragraphs inside table cells by paraId' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like word_delete_paragraphs by scoping to table cells. The method (by paraId) is also stated.

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 'inside table cells' implies the context of use, separating it from general paragraph deletion. However, there is no explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' guidance, nor mention of alternatives like word_edit_table_paragraphs for modifying instead of deleting.

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