insert_after_symbol

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses a key behavioral detail: 'The inserted code shall begin with the next line after the symbol' and 'via the symbol's location.' However, it does not cover error handling or prerequisites (e.g., symbol must exist), leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a typical use case. No redundant 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?

For a code insertion tool with an output schema and fully described parameters, the description provides adequate context: it specifies the insertion point relative to the symbol definition and gives use cases. It does not mention error scenarios or relation to sibling insert_before_symbol, but these are not critical given the output schema.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The tool description itself adds minimal parameter semantics beyond the schema; the only extra context is the cross-reference in the schema to find_symbol definitions, which is not in the description.

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 uses the specific verb 'Inserts' and identifies the resource: 'body/content after the end of the definition of the given symbol.' It distinguishes from siblings like insert_before_symbol by specifying 'after' and clarifies typical use cases (class, function, method, field, or variable assignment).

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 a clear use case scenario: 'insert a new class, function, method, field or variable assignment.' However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the context of symbol locations implies coordination with find_symbol.

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