Get Orphan Documents

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

Without annotations, the description adds useful behavioral info: it scans all docs (O(n) complexity) and includes an inTrash flag in results. It does not explicitly state the operation is read-only, but the context implies no side effects.

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?

Three sentences, each providing distinct value: definition, use case, and a note on performance and output field. No wasted words, well-organized.

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 no output schema, the description partially explains return details (inTrash flag) but omits the response format and any usage of the optional workspaceId. It covers the main behavior but lacks completeness for the parameter and full output structure.

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 description does not mention the workspaceId parameter at all. With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate by explaining the parameter's role or default behavior, which it fails to do. The purpose is clear but parameter guidance is missing.

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 action ('Find all documents that have no parent') and specifies the exact criteria using block types like embed_linked_doc and LinkedPage references. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_docs or search_docs by focusing on orphan detection.

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 mentions workspace hygiene as a use case, which implicitly guides when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives among siblings, though the purpose is clear enough.

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