Add or update title to Docling document

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating but non-destructive operation. The description adds valuable context by specifying that the tool modifies an existing cached document and requires the document to already exist. This goes beyond the raw annotation flags and clarifies the operational precondition.

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 concise and well-structured, with the primary purpose stated in the first sentence and the key prerequisite clarified in the second. There is no redundant or filler content; every sentence adds relevant information.

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 simple tool with two required, fully described parameters and an output schema, this description is complete. It states what the tool does, where it operates, and the critical precondition for use. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for both parameters, including descriptions for 'title' and 'document_key'. The tool description doesn't add much beyond the schema, but the prerequisite about the document already existing in the cache slightly reinforces the meaning of document_key. This meets the baseline for fully documented parameters.

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 a specific verb ('add or update') and resource ('title of a document in the local document cache'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also explicitly says it modifies an existing document, which distinguishes it from creation-focused siblings like create_new_docling_document.

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 provides clear usage context: this tool is for documents already processed and stored in the local cache, and it requires the document to exist before adding a title. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the prerequisite is clear enough to avoid misuse.

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