get_document_info

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden, but it only states a read operation ('Get overview stats'). It neither contradicts annotations nor provides additional behavioral context (e.g., performance, prerequisites, error handling). Basic transparency but could be richer.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the core action and a list of included stats. No wasted words; every part contributes to clarity. Highly efficient.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema (not shown), but the description omits what the output looks like or any edge cases. It is adequate for a straightforward tool but could mention that it returns a summary object.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description does not elaborate on the document_handle parameter. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no extra meaning, failing to compensate for the lack of schema description.

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 explicitly states 'Get overview stats' and lists specific resources (paragraph count, headings, footnotes, comments, images), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that retrieve individual items (e.g., get_comments). It is a specific verb+resource combination.

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 implies use when needing summary statistics rather than detailed data, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternative tools. The purpose is clear but contextual usage direction is missing.

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