apex_add_page_js

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

No annotations provide behavioral hints, and the description only states an obvious add operation. It does not disclose whether the code replaces existing page JS, is appended, any side effects, or whether it is safe to re-run. The schema mention of a hidden static region is not in the tool description.

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, clear sentence that immediately states the action and scope. It is front-loaded with the essential purpose and contains no filler or redundancy.

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?

Although the schema is thorough and an output schema exists, the tool description is too minimal for a mutating operation with no annotations. It does not explain the effect on existing page scripts, whether the tool can be undone, or how it relates to sibling tools like apex_add_global_js. More context is needed for a tool that modifies a page.

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%, with clear descriptions and examples for each parameter, especially javascript_code and js_file_urls. The tool description itself adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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) and resource (inline JavaScript) with a specific scope (a specific page). It distinguishes from the sibling tool apex_add_global_js by emphasizing page-specificity, though it does not mention the external JS file URL support, which is a minor incompleteness.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like apex_add_global_js for app-wide scripts or apex_add_page_css for styles. It lacks any contextual direction or exclusions.

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