Insert Block Reference

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, so the agent already knows this mutates state; the description's 'insert' verb is consistent and adds no contradiction. The parenthetical adds useful behavioral context that the block definition must already exist, but it does not cover error handling, layer defaulting, or behavior for a nonexistent name.

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 15-word sentence with the verb front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though the saved space could have carried sibling differentiation.

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 output schema and 100% parameter coverage carry most of the load for this moderate-complexity tool. The main gaps are the ambiguous relationship with block_insert and unstated failure behavior when the named definition does not exist.

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 seven parameters are already documented in the input schema, placing the baseline at 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Insert a block reference') and the parenthetical clarifies the operation creates an instance of an existing definition rather than a new definition. However, it does not differentiate from the closely named sibling block_insert, so an agent scanning the tool list could pick the wrong one.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus block_insert or block_create_from_entities. There are no usage conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions anywhere in the description.

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