insert_text_after

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It lacks any mention of side effects, permissions, error conditions, or limitations. The term 'insert' implies modification but no further detail is given.

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 short and uses a structured docstring format with Args section. It is front-loaded with the purpose. Minor improvement would be to avoid listing all examples inline, but it's acceptably concise.

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 3 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema that is not referenced, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, how it behaves in edge cases, or any prerequisites. Additional context is needed for a well-rounded understanding.

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 lists the three parameters and provides example values for block_type (e.g., paragraph, heading_1). This adds some context beyond the schema, but does not explain the semantics of each parameter fully.

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 tool inserts a text block after a specific block, using clear verb ('insert') and resource ('text block'). However, it says 'simple text block' which is slightly vague given the variety of block types supported.

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. Sibling tools like 'insert_blocks_after' and 'append_blocks_to_page' exist but are not differentiated, leaving the agent without context to choose correctly.

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