Set Active Document

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

The description conveys a state-changing behavior ('Switch') and adds that the name must be a previously returned value, which prevents agents from trying arbitrary file paths. It does not, however, explain what 'active' means for subsequent operations or what happens if the given name is not valid. The annotations do not contradict this; they simply provide no additional behavioral detail.

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 focused sentence with no filler. The key action and the critical parameter provenance are both front-loaded and immediately usable.

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?

This is a simple, one-parameter tool with no output schema and sparse annotations, so the description carries the responsibility for usage context. It covers the action and the source of the valid input value, though it could mention the prerequisite that the document must already be open and that this affects subsequent operations.

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 input schema provides only a type and title for the single parameter with no description, so the description must compensate. It does so by specifying that 'name' is the value returned from new_document/open_document, giving the agent actionable provenance for the parameter beyond the bare schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Switch the active document by name.' It also references the expected input source—'the value returned from new_document/open_document'—which helps distinguish this tool from related sibling tools like open_document or use_workspace.

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 clear context: the tool selects an already-known document by name and that name comes from new_document/open_document. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives such as open_document or use_workspace, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites like the document already being open.

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