AxDocumentAnnotator_annotate_file

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions file type support but does not indicate whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or what the output includes. Lacks details on side effects or authentication needs.

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 very short and front-loaded. Every sentence adds value (purpose + supported types). No wasted words, but could be more informative in the same space.

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 the lack of output schema, the description should explain what the annotation result is. It does not mention return values or behavior. For a 2-param tool with no nested objects, the description is incomplete.

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 100%, so basic param info is already present. The description adds context about supported file types beyond the schema but does not elaborate on the 'query' parameter or file_path format beyond what is already defined.

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 clearly states the verb 'annotate' and the resource 'file', and lists supported file types (PDF, PNG, JPEG, MD, TXT). It distinguishes from sibling tools like AxDocumentParser_parse_pdf_to_md which converts formats rather than analyzing.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like the parser or analysis tools. The supported file types hint at scope but no context on exclusions or prerequisites.

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