insert_text_box

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the text box is inline (not floating) and the insertion position is after a given paragraph. It returns a JSON with the new element. However, it does not mention potential side effects (e.g., layout changes), error handling for missing para_id, or required permissions.

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 with a clear structure: a one-sentence purpose, labeled parameter list, and return type. Every sentence adds value, though the parameter list could be slightly tightened.

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 output schema is implied by the return description, the description covers purpose, all parameters, and return format. It lacks details about error handling or edge cases, but for a 4-parameter tool with a straightforward purpose, it is largely 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 input schema has 0% description coverage (only titles). The description adds meaningful context for all parameters: para_id (reference paragraph), text (text content), width_cm (width in cm, default 5.0), height_cm (height, default 2.0). This compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 action: 'Insert an inline text box after the paragraph with para_id.' It uses a specific verb (insert) and resource (inline text box) with precise placement (after the reference paragraph). This distinguishes it from similar sibling tools like insert_image or insert_paragraph.

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 implies when to use (when you need an inline text box after a specific paragraph) but does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives. There is no guidance on prerequisites like document existence or paragraph validity.

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