create_document

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

The description discloses the default approval behavior and the consequence that approved documents are permanently locked (via the approveDoc parameter). However, it does not mention idempotency, error states, or side effects beyond that. Given no annotations, this is good but not exhaustive.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no irrelevant information. Every sentence adds value.

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 10 parameters, 4 required, and no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral nuance (approval default) but lacks details on return values, error handling, or idempotency. It is adequate but could be more complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 for approveDoc (explains default and consequences) but does not add meaning for other parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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 creates a new document (invoice, estimate, etc.), differentiating it from sibling tools like update_document or delete_document. It also specifies default behavior (approved) and provides an example of document types.

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 use for creating new documents, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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