Creates a text document in the knowledge base from provided text, with optional name and parent folder for organization.
Create Text Document
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | ||
| text | Yes | Text content to be added to the knowledge base. | |
| parent_folder_id | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no behavioral context beyond this, such as side effects, knowledge base insertion behavior, or permission requirements.
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 extremely short, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It omits necessary context and does not earn its place as a useful tool definition.
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?
For a three-parameter create operation with no output schema and only sparse annotations, the description is critically incomplete. It does not explain that the document is added to a knowledge base, the optionality or role of parent_folder_id, or any return behavior.
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 33%, with only the 'text' parameter documented in the schema. The description provides no meaning for 'name' or 'parent_folder_id', so it fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.
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 'Create Text Document' restates the tool name/title and provides no scope or distinction from sibling tools such as create_file_document_route or create_url_document_route. It states a verb and resource but is effectively a tautology rather than a differentiating purpose.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. The description does not help an agent decide between this tool and the many other create/update document routes.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.