load_stencil

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 (opening a temporary copy if the file is locked) and the return value. Missing are error handling, path requirements, or side effects on the Visio session, but what is provided offers useful context beyond the raw schema.

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, front-loaded with the core action, and every clause adds value. No fluff or repeated schema information.

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 tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema, so the description need not detail return structure. It covers the lock behavior and key return, which is helpful. However, it does not differentiate from open_document or mention prerequisites, leaving some usage context unclear.

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 mentions 'file' but does not explicitly define the 'path' parameter beyond its name. The context implies path is the stencil file location, but the description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's parameter 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 uses a specific verb ('Open') and resource ('stencil file'), clearly distinguishing it from open_document (documents) and aligning with drop_master. The explicit return value ('stencil key for drop_master') further clarifies the tool's role.

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?

Usage is implied: the description says it returns a stencil key for drop_master, suggesting this is a prerequisite for dropping masters. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus alternatives like open_document or list_stencils, and no exclusions are given.

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