add_footnote_before_text

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'proper superscript formatting' and 'ensures footnotes display correctly,' which hints at formatting behavior, but lacks critical details: whether this modifies files in-place, requires specific permissions, handles errors, or affects document structure. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 brief (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the second sentence ('This enhanced function ensures...') is somewhat redundant and doesn't add substantial value, slightly reducing efficiency.

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 tool's complexity (modifying documents with footnotes), lack of annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and multiple sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It misses parameter explanations, behavioral details, and differentiation from alternatives, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It doesn't explain any of the 4 parameters (filename, search_text, footnote_text, output_filename). For example, it doesn't clarify what 'search_text' targets or how 'output_filename' works. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 purpose: 'Add a footnote before specific text with proper superscript formatting.' This specifies the verb (add), resource (footnote), and location (before specific text). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'add_footnote_after_text' or 'add_footnote_enhanced,' which would require 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling tools for footnotes (e.g., 'add_footnote_after_text,' 'add_footnote_enhanced'), there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. The second sentence about 'enhanced function' is vague and doesn't clarify usage scenarios.

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