tosea_parse_pdf

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only hints at constraints for template_file_id but does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or the meaning of 'parse-only stage'.

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 with no repetition. First sentence states main purpose, second provides parameter usage. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 12 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain most parameters and does not describe return values or workflow integration.

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 should compensate. It explains logo_file_id and template_file_id but leaves 10 of 12 parameters (instruction, render_provider, etc.) completely undocumented. Only minimal value added.

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 the action 'upload local source files and run the parse-only stage', specifying verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like tosea_pdf_to_presentation which do more than parsing.

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 gives some parameter usage guidance ('Use logo_file_id for...', 'Use template_file_id only with slide_mode="image"...'), but does not provide explicit when/when-not alternatives or context for selecting this tool over siblings like tosea_create_document_parse.

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