document_series_create

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world. The description adds the important behavioral fact that the prefix must be unique per company+type (implying a failure mode on duplicates) and explains numbering semantics via currentNumber — real context beyond annotations. Return value and error behavior are still absent.

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?

Four tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and the unique-prefix constraint immediately after. The example list and default restatement are somewhat redundant with the schema, preventing a 5.

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 create tool with no output schema, the description explains uniqueness and numbering but doesn't say what the call returns, whether the series becomes default/active automatically, or what the duplicate-prefix failure looks like — meaningful gaps for an agent that must decide how to proceed after calling it.

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 100%, so all five parameters are documented in the schema, including prefix examples and the currentNumber default. The description's example prefixes and default restatement largely duplicate that, so it sits at the baseline rather than adding new syntax or format details.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Create a new document series') that is unambiguous and clearly distinct from siblings like document_series_update, document_series_list, and document_series_set_default. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Implied usage (create a series before issuing documents of that type) but no explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance or reference to alternatives such as document_series_update or document_series_numbering_decision. The uniqueness constraint hints at a pre-check but doesn't route the agent anywhere.

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