create_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool creates a document and returns success/failure, but does not explain side effects, permissions, or behavior if the document already exists. This is adequate for a simple create operation but lacks deeper behavioral detail.

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 well-structured with Args, Returns, and Examples sections. It is concise, front-loaded with the main action, and every line adds value without waste, including a helpful JSON example.

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 with no output schema, the description covers the action, parameter, return value, and includes an example. It is complete enough for straightforward use, though it could mention behavior around duplicate names or prerequisites to be fully comprehensive.

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 description explains the sole parameter 'name' with a clear purpose ('The name of the document to create') and includes a full example JSON. Schema coverage is minimal, but the description compensates by providing a concrete usage example, adding meaning beyond the schema's field title.

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 a specific verb+resource ('Create a new document in FreeCAD') clearly stating the function. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling create_object, but the resource (document vs object) is distinct, making the purpose clear without explicit sibling comparison.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of sibling tools like create_object. The example illustrates usage but does not discuss context, alternatives, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer when this tool is appropriate.

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