create_envelope

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the returned envelope status and the need for a follow-up call, providing moderate transparency. However, it omits details like error states, permission requirements, or whether the operation is idempotent.

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 efficient sentences front-loaded with the verb and resource. No filler text; every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the complexity (nested objects, no output schema, no annotations), the description is brief. It explains the core workflow but lacks information on return format, error handling, and optional parameter usage. The absence of an output schema means the agent needs more detail to understand the response.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add new semantic details beyond what the schema already provides. It aligns with the documents and requesterName parameters but offers no extra context for metadata or nested recipient fields.

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 verb 'Create', the resource 'signing envelope', and the source 'from one or more existing PDFGate documents'. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like 'send_envelope' by noting the created status and the need to call that tool for dispatch.

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 gives explicit context: create from existing documents, then call send_envelope to dispatch. While it doesn't list when not to use or alternative tools, the mention of the next step provides clear usage guidance.

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