switch_document

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It states the tool switches to another open document but does not explain side effects (e.g., changes to active document state, whether the previous document remains open) or error conditions (e.g., invalid path, document not open). 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 very short (one sentence plus Args/Returns) with no fluff. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, but the structure could be improved by including a more descriptive opening sentence.

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 simple tool with one parameter, the description covers the basic purpose and return type but lacks details on error handling, prerequisites, and relationship to siblings. The output schema exists but is not provided, so the return description adds some completeness.

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?

The schema has 0% parameter description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It specifies 'Path to the document to switch to,' which clarifies the parameter's purpose but lacks details on path format, relative/absolute, or allowed values. Some value is added, but minimal.

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 ('Switch to a different open document'), using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'open_document' or 'list_open_documents', which could cause confusion about when to use this tool.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'open_document' for opening a closed document). The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., document must already be open) or exclusions.

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