add_cell

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adequately discloses the unique name constraint, placement semantics, and the special `run='stale'` behavior that executes cells and returns results. However, it does not mention potential side effects like saving or error handling.

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 three sentences that front-load the purpose and efficiently cover key behaviors. No redundant or irrelevant 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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters and no output schema, the description provides reasonable coverage but lacks return value details for non-stale runs and does not address error conditions or prerequisites. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 covers `name`, `after`, `index`, and `run` meaningfully, but fails to explain `path`, `source`, and `cell_type` beyond their default values, leaving gaps for 3 of 7 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 the verb 'Add' and the resource 'cell', and provides details on naming and placement. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_cell' or 'remove_cell', but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 explains placement options and the `run` parameter behavior, which gives context for when to use this tool. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or when to prefer alternatives (e.g., 'update_cell' for modifications).

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