xbrl_create_instance

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and the description adds no behavioral details beyond stating it creates a new document. Missing info on side effects, overwrite behavior, or resource impact.

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 (two paragraphs) and includes structured Args/Returns sections. Some ambiguity in return type (XML vs JSON) slightly reduces clarity.

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?

The description covers the basic function and return format but lacks details on error handling, validation, or concurrency. Given the presence of an output schema, the omission of advanced context is acceptable but not exceptional.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for each parameter (schema_ref, entity_id, entity_scheme, facts). The tool description only summarizes them without adding new semantic detail, so baseline score applies.

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 XBRL instance document from scratch' and details the output (XML as string). It is distinct from sibling tools which are primarily for reading or analyzing existing filings.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as when to modify an existing instance or when prerequisites are needed. The phrase 'from scratch' implies creation but lacks explicit context.

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