Word Save

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: what happens if no document is open, whether the save requires a pre-existing file path, or whether the operation can fail or prompt. Only the mutation nature of the call is conveyed.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is efficient, though so terse that it borders on under-specification rather than genuine concision.

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?

An output schema exists and there are no inputs, so the surface area is small, but the absence of annotations means the description should still say what the save acts on and what state it requires. The key precondition (an open, previously saved document) is left unstated.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond what the empty schema already conveys. Baseline applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('save the current document') and scopes it with 'in place', which implicitly separates it from word_export_pdf and the read-only siblings. It doesn't name a sibling explicitly, so it stops just short of full differentiation.

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?

'In place' hints that this is the non-exporting save path, implying word_export_pdf is the alternative for writing out to another destination. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement, only inference.

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