create_document

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

Without annotations, the description partially discloses behavior: it notes that palette index 0 is always transparent. However, it omits other important traits like side effects, return value, or whether the document becomes active.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second explains palette. Highly efficient.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't mention that width/height are required, nor what the tool returns (e.g., document ID). The palette detail is helpful, but overall context is lacking.

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 low (33%), and the description adds meaning for 'palette' (preset names or hex colors). But 'width' and 'height' are not explained beyond schema bounds, so the description only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 'Create a new pixel art document', specifying the verb 'create' and the resource 'pixel art document'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like open_document by focusing on creation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., open_document). The description does not specify prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

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