package_document

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

With no annotations, the description must communicate behavioral traits. 'Package document for printing' implies asset collection but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether the document is modified, what is produced, or permission requirements). The description is insufficiently transparent.

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 extremely concise (4 words), front-loading the purpose. While it earns points for brevity, it sacrifices some clarity that could be achieved with a slightly longer sentence without becoming verbose.

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 moderate complexity of packaging (4 parameters, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the process, output, or any constraints (e.g., whether the document must be saved first). The agent lacks essential context for safe invocation.

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?

All four parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining the importance of including fonts/links/profiles or the purpose of outputPath.

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 'Package document for printing' clearly states the action and target resource, distinguishing it from siblings like 'package_book' and 'export_pdf'. However, it lacks specificity on what packaging entails (e.g., collecting linked assets).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'export_pdf' or 'print_book'. There are no mentions of prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for decision-making.

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