create_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that a new document is created; it does not disclose side effects, permissions needed, error behavior, or whether the created document is returned. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easy to scan. However, it is somewhat under-specified, so it loses a point for completeness even though the conciseness itself is good.

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?

With no output schema and a nested object parameter, the description leaves important context unexplained. It does not mention what the 'data' object should contain, which doctypes are supported, or what the response looks like. This is inadequate for a tool that creates resources.

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 already provides 100% coverage for both parameters (doctype and data) with descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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') and resource ('a new document in ERPNext'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_document and get_documents. It is specific enough to convey the core purpose, though it could add a bit more scope detail such as requiring a doctype.

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 for creating new documents but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives, nor any exclusions. There is no mention of scenarios where update_document might be more appropriate or of prerequisites for creation.

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