create_document

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

With no annotations present, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only says 'create', which implies mutation, but discloses no side effects, permissions required, error conditions, or success/failure behavior. This is insufficient for safe and correct invocation.

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 a single sentence, achieving conciseness but at the expense of necessary detail. It lacks structure (e.g., parameter explanations, usage notes) that would improve usability. It is appropriately sized for a simple create action but falls short due to absence of critical 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?

Given the absence of annotations, 0% schema coverage, and a large sibling set with many document-related tools, the description is grossly incomplete. It does not specify return values, input constraints, or relationships to other tools (e.g., folder_id dependency). An AI agent cannot reliably invoke this tool correctly based solely on this description.

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%, meaning parameters lack any description. The tool description adds no meaning to the parameters: it does not explain the role of 'fields_json' (e.g., what format, is it required?), 'folder_id' (e.g., must it exist?), or 'name' (e.g., uniqueness?). This forces the agent to guess parameter semantics.

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 'Create a new document record' clearly states the action (create) and resource (document record). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like update_document, delete_document, and copy_documents, but lacks additional context about what constitutes a document in this system.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., batch_upload_documents, add_document_revision). No prerequisites or context for invocation are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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