file_document

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states it creates a referential relationship and returns an ID or error, but it does not describe side effects, permissions, idempotency, or what happens if the relationship already exists.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a technical detail about the GraphQL API which may be unnecessary. The parameter documentation is clear and structured. Slightly verbose but effective.

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?

For a tool with two simple parameters and an output schema, the description covers return value and error behavior. However, it lacks information on preconditions (e.g., document and folder must exist), idempotency, and conflict handling, leaving gaps in completeness.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by documenting both parameters, explaining that they accept unique identifiers or paths. This adds meaningful context 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 clearly states the tool files a document to a folder, creating a containment relationship. The verb 'file' and resources 'document' and 'folder' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like 'create_document' or 'unfile_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 the tool is used to file a document into a folder, but it offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like the existence of the document and folder.

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