insert_hwp_table

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the table is inserted at the end of the body and the structure of headers/rows, but it does not explain side effects like in-place modification vs. output file, error handling, or prerequisites (e.g., file format validation).

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 two sentences: the first clearly states the purpose and the second concisely summarizes the parameters. Every sentence adds value with no redundant or misleading information.

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 no output schema, the description does not cover return values or error cases. It mentions optional output_path but not default behavior. Additional completeness could include validation of headers/rows format or file handling constraints.

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 headers is a single-row array of strings and rows is an array of row arrays, adding structural meaning. However, file_path and output_path are not elaborated beyond their names, leaving some ambiguity.

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 tool inserts a new OWPML table at the end of an .hwpx body, using specific XML elements (<hp:tbl>, <hp:tr>, <hp:tc>). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like append_hwp_table_row by implying creation of a new table rather than adding to an existing one.

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 usage for inserting a new table but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like append_hwp_table_row or append_hwp_table_column. No when-not-to-use or context is provided, leaving the agent to infer from the sibling tool names.

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