create_envelope

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the draft return status and the automatic idempotency key handling for safe retries. It does not mention permissions or potential side effects, but the core creation behavior is well covered.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. Each sentence adds essential value: purpose in first, behavioral note in second. Perfectly front-loaded and efficient.

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 9 parameters and no output schema, the description is terse. It covers purpose and a key behavior but omits details on routing mode, expiration, or parameter interdependencies. Adequate but could be more helpful for such a complex tool.

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 low (11%), but the description adds meaning by explaining the two modes and key parameters (templateId, recipients, inline fields). While individual parameters are not detailed, the high-level guidance compensates well.

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 tool creates a signing envelope via two distinct paths (from uploaded document with inline fields or from a template). It specifies the return status (draft) and distinguishes from siblings like create_envelope_from_template or send_envelope.

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 outlines when to use each path (inline fields vs template+recipients) and mentions the draft status implying it doesn't send automatically. However, it does not explicitly contrast with create_envelope_from_template or give a when-not-to-use, leaving some ambiguity.

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