postDocuments

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the tool is idempotent, what happens on duplicate attempts, or if it requires specific permissions. The simple 'Creates a list' lacks critical behavioral context for a mutation 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?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise but arguably under-specified for a tool with a complex nested input schema. It could include brief context on what 'list' means or the role of the spaceId without being verbose. Every sentence should earn its place; here it is too sparse.

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 tool's complexity (3 required parameters, nested objects) and the absence of an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., created document IDs or objects). It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about the response. Completeness is insufficient for reliable invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not clarify how projectId, spaceId, and requestBody relate or that requestBody must contain a 'data' array of document objects. It simply restates the action implied by the schema.

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 'Creates a list of Documents' clearly states the verb (creates) and resource (Documents). It distinguishes from sibling tools like postWorkItems by specifying the document type. However, it does not explicitly mention the project/space context, which is implied by the parameters.

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 on when to use this tool over alternatives like copyDocument, branchDocument, or postDocumentComments. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, 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.