write_docs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: requires a read_write token and rejects read-only tokens. This is valuable, but it does not state whether edits overwrite existing content, whether the tool is destructive, or what side effects may occur.

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 two sentences long, with the purpose front-loaded and the auth requirement as a concise second sentence. Every word earns its place with no filler.

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?

The description fails to explain what inputs the tool expects. With an empty schema and no output schema, the description must compensate by specifying how to provide doc content (e.g., document ID, content format, file path), but it only states 'Create/edit doc content' without any operational details. This makes it inadequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 input schema has zero properties and additionalProperties true, so there are no parameters to document. The baseline for 0 params is 4. The description does not add parameter-specific details, but none are needed given the open schema.

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 says 'Create/edit doc content' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing this write tool from the many read-only sibling tools like get_info and read_doc_sections.

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 implies this tool is for creating or editing doc content, and its mention of read_write scope hints that it's not for read-only operations. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any read-only alternatives to defer to.

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