Save document

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

No annotations exist, but the description compensates fully. It discloses folder creation, copy behavior (instant, cannot corrupt), base64 inefficiency, overwrite refusal with backup, and the return value (path and size). This is comprehensive behavioral disclosure.

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 concise yet well-structured: purpose in the first sentence, then PREFERRED/FALLBACK formatting, then overwrite behavior and return value. Every sentence contributes no waste.

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?

For a file-saving tool with 4 well-documented params and no output schema, the description fully covers behavior, parameter selection, safety considerations, and expected return. No critical information is missing.

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%, but the description adds critical depth: why source_path is preferred (instant, no corruption), why content_base64 is limited (token-by-token generation, response limit), and the mutual exclusivity of the two parameters. This goes beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 'Save a generated document (docx or PDF) into the Resumes folder' with a specific verb, resource, and destination. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_documents, delete_document, and read_document.

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 PREFERRED (source_path) and FALLBACK (content_base64) usage paths, including size limits and performance tradeoffs. It also instructs 'Give exactly one of the two', giving clear guidance on parameter selection.

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