create_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It does disclose that the document is made active and that FreeCAD may append digits to ensure a unique internal name, which is useful. However, it does not mention that the document exists only in memory until saved, nor does it describe what happens to the previously active document.

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 two sentences followed by a compact list of arguments. It front-loads the core purpose and each sentence/argument earns its place without redundancy or fluff.

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 simple two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers creation, activation, naming behavior, and label semantics. The only notable gap is not mentioning that the document must be explicitly saved to persist, which is relevant in the context of sibling save_document, but this is a minor omission.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that 'name' is an internal identifier that FreeCAD may modify for uniqueness, and 'label' is an optional display name shown in the tree. With 0% schema description coverage, this fully compensates for the schema's lack of context.

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 uses a specific verb ('create') and resource ('document') and adds the key behavioral detail that the new document becomes active. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like open_document and list_documents.

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 implies use when a new document is needed (as opposed to opening an existing one from siblings), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria. The guidance is only implicit.

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