create_doc

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of disclosing that this is a mutating operation. It does say 'Create' and lists the returned document fields, which covers the core behavior. However, it does not mention required Drive permissions, failure modes, or constraints around folder_id, so behavioral transparency is only partial.

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 compact and front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by a clean Args/Returns structure. There is no filler or repetition, and each listed item earns its place.

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 create tool, the description covers what the tool does, the parameter roles, and the returned shape, and an output schema exists to formalize return values. It would be more complete with usage guidance or permission/error notes, but the essential invocation context is present.

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 add parameter meaning, and it does: title is 'Document title', content is 'Optional initial text content', and folder_id is 'Folder to create the doc in'. This goes beyond the raw type/required information in the schema, though it could add more detail about content format or folder_id format.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new Google Doc.' This clearly identifies the operation and distinguishes it from siblings like read_doc, update_doc, and delete_file. The Args/Returns structure further reinforces what the tool does.

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?

There is no statement about when to use create_doc versus alternatives such as upload_file, create_folder, or update_doc. An agent must infer the appropriate context from the function name and sibling list, which is not reliable. No exclusions or alternative conditions are provided.

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