Create Document

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent write operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context by explaining the immediate side effects of parentDocId (linked into sidebar tree) and folderId (placed inside folder), which goes beyond annotation hints.

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-loads the main action, and avoids fluff. Every sentence contributes meaningful information about the tool's behavior.

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 the output schema exists (so return values aren't needed in the description) and the parameter schema covers all 5 parameters, the description sufficiently explains the core purpose and key side effects. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are already well-documented. The description adds minimal extra meaning—mostly restating that parentDocId links the doc and folderId places it in a folder. This is helpful but not transformative, aligning with the baseline of 3.

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 action ('Create a new AFFiNE document') and specifies the resource and side effects (linking into sidebar tree, placing in folder). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_doc_from_markdown or create_semantic_page.

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 the tool (creating a new document with optional content and sidebar placement) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. No guidance is given on choosing this over sibling tools like create_doc_from_markdown.

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