DocX — Déposer un modèle

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the file is base64 encoded and that the tool returns ID and detected tags. However, it omits behavioral aspects like whether existing templates with the same name get overwritten, any size limits, required permissions, or the format of output (e.g., response structure).

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, with two efficient sentences. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second adds critical information about return value and encoding. No excess words.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description provides essential information but lacks details on behavior like duplicate handling, file size constraints, or authorization. For a tool that performs a write operation, more context would be beneficial for successful invocation.

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%, so the schema already describes both parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond confirming that template_base64 is base64-encoded content, which aligns with the schema description. No additional semantics are provided for template_name.

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 verb 'Dépose' (uploads) and the resource 'modèle Word (.docx)', and it distinguishes from sibling tools like docx_update_template by implying this is for creating/uploading a new template. It also mentions the return value of ID and detected tags, which further clarifies the purpose.

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 does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives such as docx_update_template or docx_list_templates. It implicitly suggests using it for initial template upload, but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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