addDocument

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It does not disclose return values, validation rules, permission requirements, or side effects like notifications. This is particularly weak for a mutating operation.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded and free of extraneous words. It is as concise as possible, though perhaps too sparse to be helpful.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the expected result (e.g., returns created document), how parameters interact, or constraints. The schema covers fields but the description fails to give operational context.

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%, so parameter semantics are fully defined in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating the project context; it doesn't clarify relationships like parentId or optionality, but the schema already handles this.

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 action (Adds) and resource (a new document) with a target context (specified project). This distinguishes it from sibling add tools like add_issue and add_wiki, though it lacks additional specificity about document types or hierarchy.

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?

No guidance is provided for when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_wiki or update_document. There is no mention of prerequisites, ordering, or when not to use it, leaving the agent without decision support.

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