apex_add_global_css

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

With all annotations false, the description carries the burden. It discloses the implementation mechanism ('via Page 0') and global reach, but it does not clarify whether CSS is appended or replaced, or what happens if called multiple times—important given idempotentHint=false. Some behavioral context is provided, but not complete.

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 is front-loaded and contains no filler. Every word adds value.

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 tool with one fully documented parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, and use case adequately. Missing explicit caveats or references to alternative tools, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a minor use-case context ('branding and theme overrides') but does not provide additional parameter-level details beyond what the schema already includes.

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 ('Add global CSS'), the scope ('ALL pages via Page 0'), and the intended use case ('branding and theme overrides'). It effectively distinguishes itself from siblings like apex_add_page_css (page-specific CSS) and apex_add_global_js (JavaScript).

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?

It explicitly identifies when to use this tool ('Use for branding and theme overrides') and the global scope, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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