new_document

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 behavioral trait (1:1 scaling meaning coordinates are inches) and states the return value (document name). However, it does not mention permissions, file handling, or whether the operation is destructive, though 'new' implies non-destructive.

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: the first front-loads the primary action, the second adds essential behavioral and return-value context. No filler or redundant 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?

For a simple creation tool with an output schema and optional parameters, the description covers the core behavior (creation, scaling, return value). It could benefit from mentioning whether the document is saved to disk or purely in memory, but overall it is reasonably complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the unit system ('coordinates are inches'), which gives meaning to the units, width, and height parameters. It does not explicitly describe the title parameter, but the parameter name is self-explanatory.

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 'Create a new blank Visio document', which is a specific verb+resource action. It also adds distinct context (page scaled 1:1, coordinates in inches) that differentiates it from sibling tools like open_document and add_page.

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 usage for creating a new document but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use. It lacks explicit guidance like 'use this when you need a blank canvas' or references to alternative tools, so usage is only implied.

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