Собрать документ по шаблону

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only and not idempotent. The description adds useful behavioral detail: it saves a ready .docx and states that the panel rejects required fields without values. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two focused sentences: the first states the core operation and result, the second explains value mapping and validation. No filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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 covers the essential invocation details: purpose, parameter semantics, key source, validation, and output artifact. With no output schema, a note on the exact return value would strengthen it, but it remains sufficient for correct 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?

Schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying that field keys come from templates_get and by explaining required-field validation behavior, which is not fully captured in the schema.

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?

Description states a specific action: 'Подставляет значения в шаблон и сохраняет готовый .docx для контрагента.' This clearly identifies the verb, resource, and output, and distinguishes it from siblings like documents_send and templates_get.

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?

Provides clear workflow context by instructing 'ключи берите из templates_get', which tells the agent where to obtain valid field keys. It does not explicitly contrast with documents_send or documents_list, but the intended use case is evident.

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