save_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses native format, workspace scope, and that omitting path re-saves in place, but omits overwrite semantics, error/permission behavior, and return information.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with a useful parenthetical covering optional-parameter behavior. It contains no redundant restatement of the tool name or title.

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 simple one-parameter tool, it covers format, location, and default save mode. However, with no annotations, no output schema, and undocumented path semantics, the missing overwrite and error details leave it short of fully complete.

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 0%, so the description must clarify path. It explains the key default, omit path to re-save in place, and the workspace location, but does not say whether path is a file, relative or absolute, or whether an extension is required.

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, save, and resource, the active document, with target formats .kra/.ora and workspace location. The native-format wording distinguishes it from export_image and document_close without needing 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?

Provides clear context for saving native documents and clarifies the optional path's alternate behavior. It does not explicitly name export_image as the non-native alternative, so the agent must infer that from the format constraint.

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