distill_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does specify outputs (HTML saved to ~/Documents/蒸馏文稿/ and Obsidian note to ~/Documents/obsidian/{subdir}/) and calls out that audio/video returns guidance. But it does not mention permissions, side effects on the source file, or how async_mode changes behavior or return values.

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 statement, bulleted supported formats, and a separate output section. It is concise, scannable, and every sentence adds relevant information without 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 file-processing tool with no output schema, the description covers supported inputs, output destinations, and a special case (media returns guidance). It lacks explicit return-value details for the normal path and does not describe the async workflow, though the schema provides some of that for async_mode. Overall, it is reasonably complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 description adds slight value by showing obsidian_subdir maps to a path placeholder ({subdir}), but file_path and async_mode are not enriched beyond their 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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Distill content from a local file into HTML article + Obsidian note.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like distill_url by emphasizing 'local file' and enumerating supported file types.

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 scope is clearly implied through 'local file' and the supported file extension list, making it clear this is for local inputs rather than URLs. However, it never explicitly names alternatives (e.g., 'use distill_url for web pages') or states when not to use this tool.

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