Create Document

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behaviors: it refuses to overwrite existing files, auto-creates parent directories, and optionally sets the title core property. This adds meaningful side-effect information, though it does not describe error handling or permissions, which would have pushed it higher.

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 four tight sentences with the main action front-loaded, followed by a key safety behavior, an explicit alternative, and workflow context. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant restating of the title or schema.

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 two-parameter creation tool with an output schema and clear annotations, the description covers the essential call behavior, overwrite refusal, directory creation, and follow-up workflow. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain the title parameter as an optional core property, but file_path is only inferred from its name and the tool's purpose; no format, extension, or path-resolution details are provided. This is adequate but leaves a gap.

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 names a specific verb ('Create'), a concrete resource ('a new blank .docx file'), and the optional title behavior. It also distinguishes itself from copy_document by explicitly stating it refuses overwrites, so an agent can clearly tell this tool apart from its siblings.

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 gives explicit routing guidance: use copy_document with overwrite=True when overwriting is intended, use this tool for blank-file creation, and use assembly-pack tools for template-driven builds. It also names follow-up population tools, giving the agent a clear workflow context.

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