create_document

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait that the document is automatically opened for editing. However, it does not mention potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing files) or authorization needs.

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?

Description is two concise sentences in the first paragraph, followed by a bullet list of arguments. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the primary action.

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 creation tool with 3 parameters and no annotations, the description is quite complete. It explains the creation process, auto-opening, and parameters. However, it does not specify return values, though an output schema exists.

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 fully compensates by explaining each parameter: output_path (required), template_path (optional .dotx), document_handle (optional handle). This adds meaning beyond the bare property titles.

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?

Description clearly states it creates a new blank .docx document or from a .dotx template. The verb 'create' and resource 'document' are specific, and it distinguishes from other tools like save_document, insert_text, etc. by noting the document is automatically opened for editing.

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?

Description provides clear context: the document is opened for editing, and users should use save_document to persist changes. It implies when to use this tool (new document creation) and mentions subsequent actions, but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it.

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