append_hwp_table_row

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Append' indicating a write operation, but does not clarify whether the file is modified in place (output_path optional) or what happens on errors (e.g., index out of range, mismatched cells length).

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-loads the purpose. The argument list is concise. Minor improvement could be structuring with bullet points, but overall efficient.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description lacks completeness. It does not mention return value, prerequisites (file/table existence), or behavior when output_path is omitted. Gaps remain.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It explains that cells is a JSON string array and its length should match column count, but does not elaborate on file_path vs output_path or table_index constraints. Partial compensation.

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 row), the resource (Nth table in an .hwpx file), and specifies the 0-based indexing. It distinguishes from siblings like append_hwp_table_column by focusing on rows.

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 implies when to use (when adding a row to a table), but offers no explicit guidance on when not to use or mentions alternatives. It is clear but lacks exclusions or context for selection.

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