Document to Markdown (Tanod)

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), and the description adds substantial behavior beyond that: 500,000-character truncation with a `truncated` flag, HTTP 415 for unsupported types, 422 for text-layer-less/encrypted/damaged files with no charge, page and cell limits, no network fetching during conversion, 1-5 s latency, price, and a prompt-injection warning on returned content.

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?

Front-loaded with the usage trigger before returning to return-value and limit details. It is dense and slightly wall-like, but nearly every clause carries operational information an agent needs; little is filler.

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 an output schema is present and annotations carry the safety profile, the description is more than complete: it covers input formats, error taxonomy, limits, latency, cost and security posture. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents url, filename and file_base64 fully, including size caps and format-detection rules. The description's "detected from the content" restates the schema rather than extending it, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (convert), resource (documents) and output format (Markdown), and enumerates the accepted input types (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, PDF, HTML, EPUB). It also names the sibling it is not (extract_pdf_tables) so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly gives the triggering condition ("Use when an agent must read a Word, Excel, PowerPoint, PDF, HTML or EPUB file as Markdown text") and names the alternative tool plus the case that selects it ("For PDF tables as rows use extract_pdf_tables"). Prerequisite guidance is also present (run OCR first for text-layer-less PDFs).

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