insert_act

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose an important side effect — that one scene and one beat are created alongside the act — which an agent could not infer from the name. However it says nothing about index shifting for later acts, permissions, failure modes, or what happens to existing structure.

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 sentence that front-loads the operation, then the cascade, then the placement options. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 write tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is only adequate. It omits what is returned (relevant since ifUpdatedAt suggests a read-modify-write loop), whether the write can fail validation, and how the new act indexes affect subsequent calls.

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 coverage is 60%: file, heading, and ifUpdatedAt are documented in the schema, while afterAct and sceneHeading are bare. The description compensates for afterAct by defining it as 1-based and as the insertion point, and implies a scene is generated with a heading, giving real meaning beyond the structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Add an act") plus its scope (one scene, one beat) and its placement (end or after act N). This implicitly separates it from insert_scene and insert_beat, which operate one level down, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

"at the end, or after act N (1-based)" tells the agent the two positioning modes, which is useful. But there is no guidance on when to prefer insert_scene/insert_beat instead, nor any prerequisite note (e.g. that the script should be read or validated first, or the role of ifUpdatedAt).

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