append_hwp_table_row

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It mentions appending a row and cell length constraint but omits critical details: error handling (e.g., invalid table_index), side effects (modifies original file if output_path omitted), and required permissions. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 brief (two sentences) and front-loaded with the key action. However, it could be better structured by separating parameter details into a list. Still, it is efficient and avoids redundancy.

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 the tool's complexity (modifying an .hwpx table) and lack of output schema, the description covers the core operation but lacks details on error scenarios, file handling, and constraints. It is minimally adequate but not comprehensive for an AI agent to invoke reliably.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains that 'cells' is a JSON string array and must match column count, and lists parameters and output_path optionality. However, it does not clarify file_path (path to .hwpx), table_index (0-based), or output_path semantics beyond 'optional'. Adds some value but not fully detailed.

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: 'Append a new row to the Nth table (0-based) in an .hwpx.' It uses specific verb and resource, and is distinguishable from sibling tools like append_hwp_paragraph and delete_hwp_table_row.

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 basic usage context (e.g., cells must match column count) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_hwp_cell_text or append_hwp_table_column. No exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use guidance.

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