New Document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full weight. It discloses the core behavior (inserts new document, switches focus by default) but does not mention potential side effects like unsaved changes in active document. The phrase 'without overwriting' implies safety, but more detail (e.g., warnings, memory) would improve transparency.

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 two sentences, 30 words, no fluff. Every sentence adds essential information: what the tool does and when to use it. Well front-loaded.

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 creation tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main aspects: action, effect on focus, and use case. It could mention return value or error handling, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 100% with parameter descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by stating 'Optional display name' and clarifying the default for make_active ('Default true'), which helps the agent understand behavior without looking at 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?

The description uses specific verb 'Insert a fresh empty BaseDocument' and clarifies the tool's role versus sibling tools like open_document or close_document, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 states the tool is 'useful for starting a clean scene without overwriting the current one'. It provides clear context for when to use, though it does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives. Given the sibling list, the user can infer that open_document is for existing files.

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