get_document_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral details. It only states what it returns, omitting whether the document must be open, if it modifies anything (unlikely but not stated), or any error conditions. With no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 succinct and front-loaded. The first sentence states the action, the second lists returned items. However, it could be more specific about the exact structure of the returned information.

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 an existing output schema, the description provides a high-level summary of what the output contains. It mentions sections, paragraphs, and tables count. This is adequate for a read-only information tool. However, it does not clarify if the document must be currently open.

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?

No parameters are defined, so parameter semantics are not applicable. The description correctly reflects 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 tool retrieves general document information including sections, paragraphs, and table counts. It uses a specific verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_document_statistics which might overlap.

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 provides no usage context or guidance on when to use this tool instead of related sibling tools like get_document_statistics, get_document_structure, or get_table_content.

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