document_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does meaningful work: it discloses the side effect of making the document current, the coordinate-system contract ('viewBox matches width/height, so coordinates are in unit'), and the exact artifact the background option creates (a full-page rect with id 'background'). It omits lifecycle concerns such as whether an existing unsaved document is discarded.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by the two non-obvious behavioral facts. No filler, though the backtick-heavy phrasing is slightly dense.

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?

Covers the creation action and coordinate/background semantics, but with no annotations and no output schema it leaves gaps around persistence (a save appears to be required via the document_save sibling) and the fate of any currently open document.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does for all four parameters: it ties width/height to the viewBox, explains unit governs coordinates, and gives a concrete background example plus the resulting element id.

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 and resource ('Create a new blank document') and adds the state effect ('make it current'). The word 'blank' implicitly distinguishes it from document_open, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus document_open, import_file, or split, and no mention of prerequisites or what happens to an already-open document. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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