zero_add_element

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions auto-publishing and schema-safe cloning, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., irreversible publishing), required permissions, error states, or what happens when parameters conflict (e.g., both cloneId and element provided).

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose, modes, and default behavior with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main function.

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's complexity (10 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is too sparse. It omits information about return values, error handling, conflict resolution, and the 'schema-safe' guarantee. A more complete description would help an agent use the tool correctly.

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 100% description coverage for all 10 parameters, providing baseline understanding. The description adds some context by explaining the two operational modes (clone vs insert) and the publish default, but does not significantly enhance parameter meaning beyond the schema descriptions.

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's purpose: to add an element to a Zero Block via cloning an existing element with a patch or inserting an arbitrary object. The verb 'add' and the specific modes distinguish it from sibling tools like zero_update_element or zero_delete_element.

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 some guidance on when to use the tool (to add an element) and distinguishes cloning vs insertion, but it does not explicitly exclude cases where other tools might be more appropriate, nor does it mention alternatives among the sibling tools.

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