insert_near_symbol

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Insert content before or after an indexed symbol,' which implies file modification but fails to mention side effects (e.g., potential code duplication, line shifting), required permissions, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core action. It avoids unnecessary words. However, it could benefit from additional structuring to separate intent from behavior.

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 (9 parameters, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what an 'indexed symbol' is, how to specify the insertion point (project, file), or expected outcomes. The agent lacks critical context for correct invocation.

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 covers 67% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema. It mentions 'before or after,' which aligns with the 'position' parameter, but does not clarify the purpose of ambiguous parameters like 'file_path' or the multiple aliases for 'content.' A score of 3 is appropriate given moderate schema coverage and no value added.

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 content before or after an indexed symbol.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the phrase 'before or after' distinguishes it from sibling tools like replace_symbol_source or edit_lines_in_symbol which modify existing content rather than insert new content.

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. It does not mention any prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions. The agent must infer usage context from the tool name and siblings alone.

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