outline_document

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds context that this is an overview tool rather than a full read, which is useful. It does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like pagination or performance, but given the annotation coverage, a 4 is appropriate.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and purpose, followed by a brief usage guideline. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 read-only tool with two parameters (one required) and an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, when to use it, and that it provides an overview. The output schema handles return details, so nothing critical is missing.

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% (both path and keypoint_limit have descriptions in the schema). The tool description itself does not add any meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. It does not elaborate on parameter format or behavior.

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 'opens' and resource 'document', and specifies what it returns: structure (sections, titles, length) and keywords. It also provides a usage context ('choose what to read before reading the whole text') that distinguishes it from siblings like read_document and search_documents.

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 a clear when-to-use condition: 'before reading the whole text'. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. While the sibling list implies alternatives, the description itself lacks explicit exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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