Save the document

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

The annotations indicate the tool is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive, which is consistent with a save operation. The description adds that edits are in memory until called, but does not mention return values, errors, or side effects such as overwriting existing files.

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 brief and well-structured, with a clear first sentence and a compact parameter list. No unnecessary words or redundant information are present.

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 covers the core purpose and the in-memory edit context, and the output schema exists. However, it lacks details about parameter constraints, file format implications, error handling, and whether the operation blocks until the save completes, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer.

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 schema provides no descriptions for either parameter. The description gives minimal guidance: 'document' is a file name or index (defaulting to active), and 'path' allows saving elsewhere. However, key details like path format, overwrite behavior, or relationship between document and path are not explained.

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 saves the document to disk, using a specific verb ('Write') and resource ('document'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on persistence rather than rendering, listing, or editing operations.

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 explains that edits are in memory until this is called, giving context for when to use it. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or specify when to use the optional 'path' parameter versus saving to the default location.

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