save_document

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the path being required first time but does not disclose key traits such as whether saving overwrites existing files, what 'instead' refers to, or error behavior. This is a significant gap for a mutation operation.

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 extremely concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and uses a clear args list. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without any redundancy or filler.

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 save operation, the description covers the essential mechanics of specifying document and path. However, it omits behavioral context like overwrite policy or what the 'active' document refers to, leaving some ambiguity. The presence of an output schema mitigates the need to describe return values, but the description still feels incomplete.

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 substantial meaning beyond the raw schema: it explains that 'document' names the document and defaults to the active one, and that 'path' overrides the destination and is required on first save. The schema lacks per-parameter descriptions, so this compensates well.

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 the specific verb 'Save' with the resource 'a document', which clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like create_document, open_document, and close_document. It unambiguously states the action performed.

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 provides usage context for the 'path' parameter, noting it is required on first save, and mentions that 'document' defaults to the active one. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions, leaving usage to be inferred from the tool's purpose.

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