verify_document

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses SOX-302 checks and audit trail generation, but does not state if verification is read-only, whether document content is modified, or what permissions are required. Lacks error handling details.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with action and framework. Every sentence adds value.

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 one parameter and no output schema, description covers purpose, framework, and audit trail. However, it does not explain return values or failure behavior. Only minor gap for a simple tool.

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 covers 100% of params with description for 'path'. Tool description adds context that the document is financial and verification follows DRP-2026/SOX-302, enhancing understanding beyond the schema's generic 'Path to the financial document.'

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?

Clearly states it verifies a financial document against the DRP-2026 compliance framework with SOX-302 checks and audit trail generation. Verb+resource+scope is specific. No sibling tools to differentiate, so no penalty.

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 or not use this tool. No mention of prerequisites, alternative tools, or context where verification is appropriate. Agent must infer from domain knowledge.

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