analyze_document

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

No annotations provided. The description mentions parsing, scoring, and deciding but doesn't disclose side effects, whether it mutates state, or what 'decide' entails (e.g., does it trigger acceptance/rejection?).

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 a single short sentence, which is concise, but it lacks necessary detail. Conciseness is good, but under-specification harms usability.

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 the high number of sibling tools and no output schema, the description fails to explain how this tool fits in the workflow, what it returns, or what 'decide' means in relation to accept/reject.

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?

The only parameter 'kwargs' has no schema details, type, or description. Schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not clarify what kwargs expects, making it impossible to invoke correctly.

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 states it parses, scores, and decides on a document, but 'decide' is vague. Among siblings like accept_document and reject_document, it's unclear how this differs—it may be the analysis step, but that's not explicit.

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. Siblings include accept/reject documents, but no context on workflow order or prerequisites.

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