split_pdf

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

With no annotations, the description adds behavioral context: mentions memory efficiency and that it copies C-level pointers. This goes beyond the schema. It implies non-destructive behavior ('creates a new PDF'), but could disclose more (e.g., no modification of source).

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 with clear function followed by a performance note. No unnecessary words; both sentences earn their 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?

The tool is simple with 3 parameters and no nested objects. An output schema exists (not shown but indicated), so return values are covered. The description explains the core function and a key performance trait. Could mention error handling or modification behavior, but adequate.

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 100%, so the schema already describes each parameter. The description adds no additional parameter-level information beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states 'Creates a new PDF containing only the specified page ranges' with a specific verb ('creates') and resource ('new PDF with specified pages'). Distinct from siblings read_pdf (read operations) and save_markdown_summary (different output format).

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 implies usage for extracting page ranges but provides no explicit 'when to use vs alternatives' or 'when not to use'. The memory efficiency hint is a characteristic, not usage guidance.

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