extract_document_events

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral traits. It discloses the tool stores to database (a write operation), but lacks details on whether it is destructive, permissions needed, rate limits, or error handling. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 (24 words), front-loads the main action, and includes illustrative examples. Every phrase is informative with no waste.

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?

Despite a clear purpose, the description omits critical context: no output schema, so the return type (e.g., job ID or status) is unspecified. No mention of side effects, prerequisites, or performance impact. Incomplete for a mutation tool with no annotations.

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% with both parameters well-described. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema (e.g., does not elaborate on doc_id or min_confidence). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: extracting temporal events (with concrete examples like product releases, milestones) from a document. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'extract_entities' (which extracts named entities) and 'search_events_by_date' (which queries already extracted events).

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 provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'search_events_by_date' for querying events or other extraction tools. No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or references to siblings are included.

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