Save Document

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does well by stating absolute-path requirements, parent-directory existence, supported formats with defaults, and the side-effect that copy:true leaves the internal name/path unchanged. It does not state overwrite behavior or error return, but the most critical behaviors are disclosed.

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 three sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, followed by essential constraints, then format details, then the copy nuance. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy.

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 three-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential context: what is saved, path requirements, format options, and copy semantics. Minor gaps like return values and overwrite behavior exist, but they do not prevent correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by listing format aliases (abc / alembic), identifying c4d as the default, and elaborating on the copy parameter's Save-As-Copy behavior. This extra context helps the agent choose correct values.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Save the active document to disk.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from file-related siblings like open_document, new_document, and import_scene. The additional scope qualifier 'active' pinpoints exactly which document is affected.

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 concrete preconditions: the path must be absolute and the parent directory must exist. It also clarifies format selection and the Save-As-Copy semantic for copy:true. It does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools, but since no other sibling performs saving, the usage context is clear.

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