monday-create-doc

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the creation action but doesn't describe what happens after creation (e.g., returns document ID, requires specific permissions, rate limits, or error conditions). For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 perfectly concise - a single sentence that immediately states the purpose and provides the critical location parameter guidance. Every word earns its place with zero wasted text, and it's front-loaded with the core action.

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 creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the location parameter logic well but doesn't address what the tool returns, error handling, or permission requirements. Given the mutation nature and lack of structured safety information, more context would be helpful.

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 schema already documents all 6 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by clarifying the mutually exclusive parameter groups (workspace_id+kind vs. board_id+column_id+item_id), but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema descriptions.

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 ('Create a new document') and resource ('in Monday.com'), specifying the exact operation. It distinguishes from siblings like monday-create-board or monday-create-item by focusing specifically on document creation, not other Monday.com entities.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool by specifying two alternative location contexts (workspace vs. board). However, it doesn't mention when NOT to use it or compare it directly to sibling tools like monday-add-doc-block, which might be for adding content to existing documents.

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