document_intelligence_create_spreadsheet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions routing through a domain-agent dispatcher under JWT/tenant/company scope, adding some auth context. However, it omits key behavioral traits such as failure modes, rate limits, data persistence, or output structure, leaving significant gaps.

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 relatively short but includes technical routing details (domain-agent dispatcher, JWT, tenant, company) that add noise without aiding selection or invocation. The first sentence is somewhat tautological. It is not optimally concise for an agent.

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 the tool has an output schema (not explained) and no annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not describe what the tool returns, how to interpret results, or how the domain agent action relates to the agent's workflow. Essential context for effective use 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 lists two parameters ('message' as free-text objective, 'inputs' as optional JSON string) but provides no details on expected format, examples, or constraints. The guidance is minimal and does not offset the lack of schema documentation.

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 states it runs the 'create_spreadsheet' domain agent action, making it clear the tool creates a spreadsheet. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'create_spreadsheet' or other document_intelligence tools, and the phrasing focuses more on the routing mechanism than the core 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_spreadsheet' or other document_intelligence tools. There are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, leaving the agent without decision context.

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