Add Document to Collection

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that indexing is async, returns a job_id to poll, and provides a signed action receipt. It also mentions the requirement for bundle status and ownership. No contradiction with annotations.

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 well-structured with a clear opening, usage note, return contract, and examples. It is longer than minimal but every section adds value—prerequisites, async behavior, receipt handling, and invocation examples. Not all sentences are essential, hence a 4.

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 async nature and return of job_id/receipt, the description covers the full workflow: how to invoke, what to do after (poll), prerequisites, and return structure. It also aligns with sibling tools (job.status, receipt.verify, collection.search) and provides example prompts.

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 applies. The description reinforces parameter usage through examples and prerequisites but does not add substantial meaning beyond the schema descriptions, which already include examples and constraints.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Add an evidence bundle to a collection and trigger async vector indexing.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like collection.create (create collection), collection.search/ask (query), and bundle.get/receipt.verify.

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 explicitly states when to use it ('Use after collection.create'), what happens after indexing (searchable via collection.search and collection.ask), and gives prerequisites (bundle complete, collection owned). It also tells the agent to poll job.status, providing a clear workflow with alternatives.

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