create_doc_blocks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action but does not disclose behaviors like whether existing blocks are affected, what happens on invalid input, or if any permissions are required. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is appropriately concise and easy to read, achieving maximum efficiency.

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 three required parameters, no output schema, and many sibling block-related tools, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the distinction from update_doc_blocks or delete_doc_blocks, nor does it clarify that the blocks are added to an existing doc. While the schema provides param structure, the description lacks the needed context for an agent to select this tool confidently.

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 parameters are already well-documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning (e.g., how 'blocks' should be structured or the relationship between team_id and doc_id). Baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 'Create content blocks in a ClickUp Doc' uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('content blocks in a ClickUp Doc'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_doc (creates a doc) and create_doc_page (creates a page). The purpose is unambiguous.

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 such as update_doc_blocks or delete_doc_blocks. It does not mention any prerequisites (e.g., doc must exist) or whether blocks are appended. There is no contextual 'when to use' or exclusionary language.

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