insert_code_block

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

Description reveals formatting behavior: Courier New 10pt with light-gray background shading. Also notes that the language parameter is an optional hint stored only in return value, implying it doesn't affect display. With no annotations, this adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

Description is highly concise: one sentence for purpose, one for formatting, then an Args list. No redundant words. Information is front-loaded and well-structured, earning its place.

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 insertion tool with an output schema (not shown), the description covers action, formatting, and parameter semantics. It does not mention error conditions or need for an existing paragraph, but overall it's sufficient given the tool's simplicity.

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 has 0% description coverage; the description compensates by explaining all three parameters. It clarifies that para_id is the reference paragraph, text is code content, and language is an optional hint stored in return value only. This adds meaning beyond the schema 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?

Description clearly states the tool inserts a code-block paragraph after a given paragraph. The verb 'insert' and resource 'code-block paragraph' are specific, and the context 'after the given paragraph' adds precision. This distinguishes it from siblings like insert_paragraph which inserts a normal paragraph.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify prerequisites (e.g., paragraph must exist) or when not to use it. No explicit context or exclusion criteria are provided.

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