save_webi_doc

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly discloses that providing a name overwrites or saves as a new name, and that comments and annotations are preserved. It does not mention authentication or permissions, but the key destructive side effect is transparent.

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 tightly written sentences with no wasted words. The two save modes are front-loaded, making the behavior easy to parse quickly.

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 two-parameter save tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the critical overwrite and preservation behavior. Minor gaps remain around authentication or failure behavior, but nothing essential for invoking the tool correctly is missing.

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 the description must supply parameter meaning. It clearly explains the effect of webi_doc_name being omitted or specified. It does not explicitly describe webi_doc_id, but its role as the target document is strongly implied.

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 states a specific verb and resource: saving a Web Intelligence document. It also distinguishes in-place saving from Save As based on the optional parameter. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like refresh_webi_doc or delete_webi_doc, but the purpose is clear.

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 explains when to omit webi_doc_name (save in place) and when to provide it (Save As/overwrite). It does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as refresh_webi_doc or get_webi_docs. The usage guidance is therefore implied but not fully comparative.

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