append_blocks_to_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions that blocks_json should be a JSON array of block objects, but it doesn't specify behavior on invalid page_id, idempotency, or limits. The tool is implied to be mutating (append), but safety aspects are missing.

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 two sentences, with the first directly stating the purpose and the second providing parameter guidance. No extraneous information. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 complexity (multiple sibling tools) and missing annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It lacks usage guidelines, behavioral details, and explanation of the return value despite having an output schema. More context is needed for effective disambiguation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that blocks_json should be a JSON array of block objects, adding format guidance beyond the schema's 'type: string'. However, no additional meaning is provided for page_id. This partial compensation yields a score of 3.

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 'Append blocks to the end of a page' clearly states the action (append), the resource (blocks), and the specific location (end of a page). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'insert_blocks_after' which insert at a specific position.

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 implicitly suggests using this tool when you want to add blocks at the end of a page, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like 'insert_blocks_after' or other block insertion tools. No exclusions or conditions are provided.

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