text.append

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

No annotations provided. Description implies a write operation but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or behavior when data-block does not exist. Minimal transparency for a mutation tool.

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?

Single sentence, no redundant words. Highly concise and front-loaded.

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?

For a simple append operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. However, it could mention that the tool modifies the data-block in place, which is implicit but helpful for completeness.

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%. Description does not elaborate on parameters beyond their titles. No format, constraints, or examples provided. The titles ('Text to append', 'Text data-block name') offer some clarity but the description adds little value.

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?

Description clearly states 'Append to a Text data-block body', specifying the action (append) and the resource (text data-block body). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like text.write (overwrite) and text.read (read).

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 explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. The verb 'append' implies it is for adding to existing content, but no mention of prerequisites or cases where other tools are preferred.

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