insert_html_start

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It only states that HTML is inserted 'at the start', but does not specify what happens to existing content, whether the operation is reversible, or any side effects. The description is insufficient for an agent to anticipate outcomes.

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 short sentence with no waste. However, it lacks necessary detail, making it overly terse. Conciseness is good, but it should be balanced with informativeness. Here it is minimal but adequate for the simplest understanding.

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?

Given the tool has 2 required parameters, no output schema, and many similar sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or document state requirements. An agent lacks enough context to use the tool reliably without external knowledge.

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 0%, and the description adds no information about the two parameters doc_id and html. The property names are self-explanatory but the description does not clarify format, expected values, or constraints. This leaves the agent without important semantic context.

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 verb 'Insert', the resource 'HTML', and the location 'at the start of the document'. This distinguishes it from siblings like insert_html_end and insert_html_at_paragraph. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar markdown/text insertion tools at start, but the resource type is clear.

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 insert_markdown_start or insert_text_start. No prerequisites, context, or external references are given. An agent would have no basis for choosing this tool over others.

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