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

Annotations already carry idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds 'durable' and 'accessible workspace' as light behavioral context. It does not disclose permission requirements, conflict behavior, or what 'accessible workspace' means operationally, but it does not contradict the annotations.

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?

Two sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded and the workspace-selection guidance in a single follow-up sentence. No filler or redundancy.

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?

With seven parameters, low schema coverage, and an output schema present, the description covers the workspace ambiguity but leaves folderId and collaborative behavior unexplained. It is adequate for a simple create operation but not fully complete for all optional inputs.

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 only 43%, so the description should compensate; it does add value for the workspace parameters by explaining when to omit workspaceId and when to use workspaceName. However, it does not clarify folderId or collaborative semantics, and title/content are left to the schema's basic types.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Create a durable Markdown Document with initial content') and clearly signals a new-document action, distinguishing it from sibling tools like edit_article, read_article, and publish_article. The title reinforces this without ambiguity.

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 gives conditional guidance for workspace selection ('Omit the workspace selector... or pass workspaceName...'), which is useful, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives such as edit_article or list_workspaces. The intended use is implied by the verb and resource rather than explicitly contrasted.

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