document_apply_edit

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

No annotations provided. The description mentions 'after approval and revision check' implying preconditions, but does not disclose what happens if conditions fail, whether the operation is destructive, or any side effects.

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 sentence, but it is under-specified and fails to convey necessary information. It is not concise in the sense of being efficient; it is too brief.

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 tool has 4 required params, an output schema, and is a critical action. The description lacks prerequisites, error behavior, relationship to siblings, and return value context. Completely insufficient for an agent to use 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 coverage is 0% and description does not explain any of the 4 parameters. 'patch', 'approval_id', 'revision_id', and 'doc_id' are not elaborated beyond their names. No guidance on format or semantics.

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 'Apply PatchIR after approval and revision check' suggests the tool applies a patch called 'PatchIR' to a document, but the term is unclear jargon. It vaguely ties to sibling tools like propose_edit and dry_run_edit but doesn't clearly state the action.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings include document_propose_edit and document_dry_run_edit, but the description doesn't explain the workflow or preconditions.

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