template_create_document

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

The description discloses that the tool sends the document for signing by default, which is a key behavioral trait. It also explains the draft flag behavior. Annotations show readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict these. It adds value beyond annotations by detailing the default send action.

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 sections, bold emphasis, bullet list for required fields, and a JSON example. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no fluff, though it could be slightly more compact by removing redundant phrasing.

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 tool has 18 parameters (2 required), nested objects, and no output schema, the description provides a good overview for the primary use case but lacks details on many optional parameters. An agent might need additional context for full usage, but the example and required field descriptions help.

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 low (17%), and the description compensates by explaining the required parameters (template_id, recipients) with a detailed example and structure for recipients. However, it does not cover many optional parameters like name, message, subject, etc., leaving gaps for an agent.

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 'Create and send a document from a template' and distinguishes this from creating non-template documents or templates themselves. The IMPORTANT note clarifies the default sending behavior vs. draft, which helps differentiate it from sibling tools like document_create or document_send_draft.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use this tool (when user asks to send a template) and when to use draft: true (only if user explicitly asks for a draft or review before sending). This gives clear guidance and prevents misuse.

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