add_section

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It provides meaningful behavior beyond the obvious add action: creating a new page and rendering unknown types as generic custom sections from blocks. It does not cover error behavior or reversibility, but the disclosed behaviors are genuinely useful.

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 focused sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a high-value extensibility detail without rambling.

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 presence of an output schema and the nested 'section' parameter pointing to get_payload_schema, the description covers the main action and the most important behavioral nuance. It could be more explicit about how slug identifies the target site, but the overall context is sufficient for an agent to proceed.

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?

The input schema already documents the section object and position, but slug has no description and the schema coverage is only 67%. The description adds semantic value by explaining how 'type' and 'blocks' interact for custom sections, but it does not fully compensate for the undocumented slug parameter or the open-ended section object.

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 states the specific action ('Add a section to a site') and a notable outcome ('creating its own page'). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like update_section, remove_section, and reorder_sections.

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 implies the create use case and even mentions an advanced scenario (adding unknown content types), but it never explicitly contrasts this tool with alternatives such as update_section or remove_section. Usage context is present but the when-not-to-use guidance is left to inference.

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