Summarize Document

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, lowering the bar. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: 'max_tokens' truncates input not output, and the return format includes 'truncated' and 'strategy' fields, describing how the tool handles long documents.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and usage guidance. It is somewhat long due to the return structure and example prompts, but every section adds value. It remains well-organized and avoids unnecessary words.

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?

The description is complete for this tool: it provides workflow, alternatives, return structure, and example prompts. The presence of an output schema and annotations fills remaining gaps, so the description needs no additional context.

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 is 3. The tool description repeats the schema's parameter descriptions but does not add significant new meaning; example prompts and return format are helpful for overall usage but not parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Summarize document text into a prose summary and key points with citations.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings by noting 'For single-sentence Q&A, use url.qa instead' and 'For extracting specific fields, use document.extract_structured.'

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?

Explicit when-to-use guidance is provided: 'Use after document.extract_text or url.extract when you need a condensed understanding of a long document.' It also states alternatives and a typical workflow, making the usage context unambiguous.

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