save_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the immutability and versioning behavior, which is critical for an agent to understand the side effects. However, it doesn't mention any permissions or error conditions, but the core behavioral trait is well covered.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action and key behavior. Every word adds value, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 the tool's moderate complexity (3 params, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavior (immutable versioning) and the schema covers parameters. It could mention what happens on success (e.g., returns version info) but that is not required since no output schema exists. The description is complete enough for an agent to use it correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds the context that content is full markdown and slug has specific allowed values, but these are already in the schema. The description doesn't add significant extra meaning beyond the schema.

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 (save a project document by slug), the resource (project document), and the key behavior (creates a new immutable version, preserving prior versions). It distinguishes from siblings like get_document and list_documents by focusing on the save operation.

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 when to use (when you need to save a document version) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. It doesn't clarify if this is for creating new documents or only updating existing ones, which could be ambiguous.

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