Add Text to Note

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds context about insertion behavior without contradiction. It explains where text is placed and that it does not replace, adding value beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences: first conveys core functionality, second provides usage guidance and sibling differentiation. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy. Perfectly front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description covers prerequisites (note ID), behavior (insertion types), and contrasts with sibling. It lacks explicit mention of return value, but for a write operation this is acceptable. High schema coverage and clear annotations make it sufficiently complete.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description enriches parameter meanings: for 'header' it explains targeting within a section and acceptable heading levels; for 'position' it gives example use cases like 'appending, logs, updates' and 'prepending, summaries, top of mind.' This goes beyond 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 states 'Insert text at the beginning or end of a Bear note, or within a specific section identified by its header,' which is a specific verb (insert) and resource (Bear note). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tool bear-replace-text by noting that this tool inserts without replacing.

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 explicitly advises to 'Use bear-search-notes first to get the note ID' and contrasts with bear-replace-text, providing clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use it or provide alternatives beyond the one sibling.

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