insert_text

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

The description discloses the core behavior: text is appended at the document's end, and paragraph_break controls whether a new paragraph starts first. However, with no annotations, it does not cover side effects such as formatting implications, whether an open document is required, or what happens on failure.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and then focused on the one non-obvious parameter. There is no wasted 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?

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the definition is incomplete. An agent still needs to infer how to obtain a valid doc_id, whether the document must already be open, and what the operation returns. The paragraph_break behavior is helpful but does not fill those gaps.

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 explain the parameters. It explains paragraph_break but text and especially doc_id are left entirely to their property names, which is thin for an agent that needs to know where doc_id comes from.

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 a clear action ('Append text') on a clear resource ('a Writer document') and specifies the location ('at the end'). It is easy to distinguish from read-oriented siblings like get_text, though it does not explicitly name alternative 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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus related tools like add_paragraph, add_textbox, or insert_text. The only instruction, about paragraph_break, is parameter-level guidance, not tool-selection guidance.

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