scan_document

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, consistent with scanning. The description adds behavioral details such as creating files, returning inline images, and OCR, without contradicting 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?

The description is well-structured with a clear intro followed by bullet-pointed parameter details. It is somewhat lengthy (8 parameters) but front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value, though could be slightly more concise if parameter details were in schema.

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 8 parameters (none required), no output schema, the description covers all parameter details, default behaviors, return values (summary, inline images, OCR text), and error conditions (missing scanner). This is sufficient for correct tool invocation.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description thoroughly explains all 8 parameters including defaults, options, and effects (e.g., source options, resolution values, color modes, output formats). This fully compensates for the lack of schema parameter descriptions.

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 states 'Scan a document and return it so Claude can read it,' clearly specifying the action (scan), resource (document), and purpose. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'list_scanners' by focusing on scanning rather than listing.

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 explains when to use this tool (scanning documents) and provides guidance on the scanner_id parameter, referencing list_scanners for obtaining scanner IDs, and describing default behavior and error handling for missing scanner IDs.

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