extract_hwp_images

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions that output_dir is optional with a default, but fails to disclose key behaviors like file overwrite policy, image format, error handling, or performance implications for large files.

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 with two short sentences, front-loaded with the action. Every word adds value; no unnecessary details.

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?

For a simple extraction tool with two parameters, the description covers the essential operation and parameter defaults. However, it lacks details on what the tool returns (e.g., success status, list of saved files) and does not address potential errors, making it moderately 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%, so the description must compensate. It identifies file_path and output_dir, explains output_dir's default, but does not clarify file_path's expected format or specify allowed values beyond being strings. Some value added, but insufficient given the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Save every embedded image to disk,' specifying the exact action and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_hwp_image, insert_hwp_image, and list_hwp_images, which perform different operations on images.

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 a usage context (extracting images from a file) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No guidance on prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it is provided.

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