Add or update a document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses partial-update semantics ('unspecified fields are left untouched'), register resolution by code/externalId/id, and line item format. This is strong behavioral context, though it omits nuances like ignoreLock behavior.

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 three dense, front-loaded sentences: first states the core action, second explains register resolution with an example, third covers line items. No filler or 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?

Given the complex nested object and lack of output schema, the description covers essential usage: create/update, partial update, register references, and line items. It does not mention return value or lock handling, but those are optional and the core usage is complete.

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?

The description adds substantial meaning to the nested `document` parameter, explaining register reference syntax with an explicit accounting example and line item structure. This goes well beyond the schema's minimal 'DocumentUpdate object' description.

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 clearly states the tool's dual function with a specific verb and resource: 'Create (omit id) or update (include id) a document.' This distinguishes it from siblings like wflow_search_documents or wflow_create_document_with_files.

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 description explains when to create vs. update by omitting or including `id`, which is clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as bulk_update_documents, so it stops short of full 5.

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