Generiere Gutenberg Block

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but only states that it generates HTML. It does not mention whether it validates block types, handles errors, or is a pure function with no side effects. This lack of behavioral disclosure is a gap.

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, direct sentence in German, front-loading the core action and resource with no superfluous text.

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 simple purpose and the presence of a full input schema and output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it lacks usage context and does not mention the content parameter, making it less complete than ideal for an agent selecting among many Gutenberg tools.

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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The tool description merely reiterates that generation is based on block type and attributes, adding no new detail about the content parameter or attribute formatting.

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 uses the specific verb 'Generiert' (generates) and identifies the resource as 'HTML-Code für einen Gutenberg Block' (HTML code for a Gutenberg block), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that list, parse, or manage blocks.

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 gutenberg_parse_blocks or gutenberg_list_block_types. No exclusions or context are given.

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