save_document

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses create/update behavior and required conditions for creation. However, it does not discuss error handling, side effects, or output format (though output schema exists). Basic traits covered but lacks depth.

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: first sentence front-loads the main purpose, second sentence adds essential usage details. No wasted words; 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?

With 8 optional parameters, 0% schema description, and no annotations, the description covers only half the parameters. Output schema exists, so return value is handled. Missing details on icon, color, content, workspace reduce completeness for agent decision-making.

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 description must compensate. It explains id, title, project_id, and initiative_id, but omits icon, color, content, and workspace. Key parameters covered, but not all, leading to partial compensation.

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 explicitly states 'Create or update a document' with clear distinction between create and update via 'id'. It also explains the attachment to project/initiative, making the tool's purpose specific and unambiguous.

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?

Provides clear guidance on when to use id for update versus creating with title and one of project_id or initiative_id. Lacks explicit exclusion of sibling tools like get_document or search_documents, but the context shows different operations.

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