list_open_documents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does state 'Read-only — does not change which document is active,' addressing the key safety concern for a doc-state tool. It also sketches the returned shape, though it doesn't discuss ordering or behavior with zero open documents.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and safety note first, then the routing hint, then returns. The Returns and Example blocks are somewhat redundant for a zero-arg tool but are short and well-ordered.

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 zero-parameter read tool with an output schema present, the description supplies everything an agent needs: purpose, safety profile, routing to activate_document, and a preview of the return fields.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond an empty argument list.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List every SolidWorks document that is currently open'), which is unambiguous against siblings like list_components, list_features, or discover_solidworks_docs. No schema needs to be opened to know what it 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?

Explicitly frames the use case — discover what is open (assembly plus parts, drawing plus model) before switching with ``activate_document`` — and names the downstream sibling. It gives clear context but no when-not guidance or other alternatives.

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