ドキュメント変換

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it is a non-destructive external write. The description adds that files are sent to rokadoc and converted to structured text, but omits critical behavior such as whether the operation is asynchronous and requires polling via get_conversion_result.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource, with no redundant wording. It is appropriately sized for the essential information it conveys.

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 conversion tool with five parameters, no output schema, and siblings for listing conversions and retrieving results, the description is missing crucial workflow context. It does not explain that the conversion may be asynchronous or that results are fetched via get_conversion_result, leaving the agent without enough information to invoke it correctly in a pipeline.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters (file_path, from_page, to_page, space_id, space_name) are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no extra meaning about page ranges, space selection, or precedence rules.

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 states a specific verb (変換する) and resource (ドキュメントファイル) and names the external service (rokadoc), so an agent can tell what the tool does. It does not distinguish this from siblings like get_conversion_result or list_conversions, so it falls short of 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_conversions, get_conversion_result). It implies a conversion context but offers no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or workflow routing.

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