Convert PDF to Word

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

Discloses behavior well beyond the annotations: the file is uploaded to the external conv2pdf service (matching openWorldHint), the call consumes one conversion credit, and a failed/refused case is defined. This is material operational context an agent cannot infer from {readOnlyHint:false, destructiveHint:false}.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: capability, refusal condition, then side effects (upload + quota). Front-loaded and free of 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?

With no output schema, the description covers the important behavioral gaps itself: the refusal case, the external upload, the quota cost, and the password-free result. An agent has everything needed to call it and interpret failure.

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 all three parameters (input_path, output_path, password) are already documented in the schema, including defaults and the no-overwrite rule. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 verb and resource ('Converts a PDF ... to an editable Word document (DOCX)') and immediately bounds the input type, distinguishing it from siblings like convert_to_pdf and convert_pdf_to_images. An agent can select this tool without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a clear applicability condition: the PDF must contain real text, and a scanned image-only PDF is refused. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool for scanned PDFs or OCR, so it falls short of a true when/when-not routing statement.

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