document_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and barely does. It never states whether the document is created in memory vs written to disk, the measurement unit (the A4 defaults 210x297 and margin 12 imply mm), reusable defaults, or what happens on failure, all of which matter for a creation tool.

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 efficient, front-loaded sentence with no waste. It earns its place, though for a 9-parameter tool the brevity edges toward under-specification rather than tightness.

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?

Nine parameters, nested objects, low schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, yet only one sentence of guidance. The description is materially insufficient for an agent to call this tool correctly without inspecting the schema in depth.

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 only 11% (just document_id), so the description must compensate. It names three categories (dimensions, margins, settings) that loosely map to width/height, margins, and facingPages/orientation/pages/bleed/slug, but adds no units or default semantics and does not explain the surprising document_id parameter on a creation tool.

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+resource: 'Create a new InDesign document.' The word 'new' implicitly distinguishes it from sibling document_open, but no sibling is named explicitly and the listed facets (dimensions, margins, settings) are generic.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no explicit routing against document_open or the page/master creation siblings. The only signal is the adjective 'new', leaving the agent to infer that this is the right tool for a fresh document.

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