Analyze document

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It mentions the output includes a 'read-only profile', which implies the operation is read-only, but it does not explicitly state that the tool does not modify files, nor does it mention any authentication or performance considerations. The behavioral transparency is adequate but not thorough.

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 20-word sentence that front-loads the action and lists the main outputs. Every word adds value; there is no fluff or repetition. It is highly concise and well-structured.

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 has 5 parameters and no output schema, yet the description does not explain the output structure or how parameters like chunkSize affect the result. Given the complexity and the presence of sibling tools, the description is too brief to be fully complete. An agent would likely need additional context to use the tool effectively.

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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the schema already explains them. The description adds no additional meaning or context for parameters beyond what is in the schema. Thus, baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the verb 'Parse' and the resource 'local document', and lists the specific output components: read-only profile, anchors, outline, blocks, and chunks. This provides a detailed and distinct purpose compared to sibling tools like doc_read or doc_context.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like doc_read or doc_search. It lacks any 'when to use' or 'when not to use' information, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name alone.

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