Condense a document

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses cost structure (100 per 1,000 words, 10 minimum), the need for user agreement, output location ('Saves the result next to the source'), and return value ('returns its path'). This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

Three sentences that are direct and information-dense: function, output behavior, and cost/consent. No filler words or redundant restatement of the title. Every sentence earns its 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 description claims 'returns its path', but the schema includes a wait_seconds parameter that 'return[s] a job id', implying asynchronous behavior. The description does not explain when a path vs. a job id is returned, nor does it mention the sibling check_job tool for tracking. This is a significant gap for effective tool invocation.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context around output_path (saves next to source) and max_words (target word count), but it does not elaborate on individual parameter syntax or edge cases. It meets the baseline but does not significantly exceed it.

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 tool's function: 'Shorten a .docx to a target word count', naming the verb (Shorten), resource (.docx), and key constraint (target word count). This distinguishes it from siblings like humanize_document or translate_document.

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 when to use it (to condense a document) and includes a critical usage guideline: 'COSTS CREDITS... say so and get agreement first.' It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the context is clear and it provides a behavioral requirement.

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