create_document

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses template resolution behavior, including unit suffix handling and blank-drawing default. It does not mention what happens to the currently open document or failure behavior for invalid templates, though the core side effect of creating a new document is clear.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed only by relevant parameter details and examples. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 low-complexity tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the meaningful choices and edge cases well. The only minor gap is the effect on the active document state, which is mostly implied by the act of creating a new document.

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 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters: template name vs. absolute path, examples, suffix rules, and measurement's role. This adds substantial meaning beyond the raw 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?

States a specific action ('Create') on a specific resource ('new drawing document in Visio'). The Args section further clarifies that it produces either a blank or template-based drawing, distinguishing it from sibling tools like open_document and save_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 usage when a new drawing is needed, especially via the 'Omit for a blank drawing' guidance and the template/measurement behavior. However, it never explicitly contrasts with open_document or states when not to use this tool, leaving alternatives to inference.

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