rba_append_file

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

The description discloses that the file will be created if it does not exist, which is key behavioral context not present in the schema. Since no annotations are provided, this is useful. It does not mention other side effects like directory creation, but the core behavior is clear.

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?

One concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no filler or repetition.

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?

For a simple append operation, the description covers the main behavior but lacks usage guidance and parameter details. Given no annotations or output schema, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions, so the description must carry the burden. It clarifies that 'content' is text to be appended and that the path is relative to the RBA workspace. However, the createDirectories parameter is not explained, and the description does not fully compensate for the 0% schema coverage.

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 verb 'append' and the resource 'file inside the RBA workspace', and adds the creation behavior. This distinguishes it from sibling write_file and read_file tools.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rba_write_file. The description implies the append use case but does not state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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