apply_object_style

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without detailing side effects, error handling, required permissions, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 a single concise sentence without extraneous information. It efficiently conveys the core purpose but could benefit from slight elaboration on context or parameters without becoming verbose.

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 as a document design operation with many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'apply an object style' entails, whether the page item must pre-exist, or what changes occur. No output schema exists to compensate.

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?

The description adds no meaning beyond the input schema. With 67% schema description coverage, the description does not elaborate on parameter usage, constraints, or relationships. For example, it does not clarify the role of 'itemType' or 'itemIndex' in identifying the target page item.

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 'Apply an object style to a page item' clearly specifies the verb (apply) and resource (object style to page item). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'apply_character_style' or 'apply_paragraph_style' by explicitly mentioning 'object style'.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the name and description imply it is for object styles, there is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or comparison with other apply-style tools.

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