get_hwp_field_value

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation but gives no details about side effects, error handling (e.g., field not found), permissions, or return format. The minimal text does not sufficiently inform the agent of behavioral traits.

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 very short and front-loaded, achieving conciseness. However, the line 'Args: file_path, name' is redundant with the schema, and the sentence could have been more efficient. It earns a middle score because it is not verbose but could be tighter.

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 zero annotations and no output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain return values (e.g., string? number?), error scenarios, or usage context (e.g., which HWP format). This severely limits the agent's ability to use the tool correctly.

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 compensate. It merely lists the parameter names (file_path, name) without adding any semantic meaning such as expected formats, constraints, or relationships. This adds no value 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'Hancom field's current value', and specifies it retrieves by name. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like list_hwp_fields or get_hwp_info, missing an opportunity to clarify its specific role.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_hwp_field_value or list_hwp_fields. The description lacks context for when to retrieve a single field value versus other field operations.

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