add_blocks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses validation behavior ('Validates the XML before injection to prevent silent failures') and a prerequisite, but omits details like whether blocks are appended or overwritten, and 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?

Two sentences with no redundancy. The action verb is first, and every sentence adds value: purpose, validation behavior, prerequisites.

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?

The description is adequate for a single-parameter tool but lacks details about return values or confirmation, especially since no output schema exists. It covers purpose, validation, and prerequisite.

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 coverage is 100% with explicit parameter description. The description adds 'Validates the XML before injection', reinforcing the parameter's requirement but not significantly extending meaning beyond the schema.

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 'injects' and the resource 'Blockly XML blocks into the Blocks workspace', distinguishing it from siblings like get_blocks_xml (retrieve) and clear_blocks (remove). It also adds context about validation and a prerequisite.

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 includes a clear prerequisite ('Requires the IDE to be in Blocks view'), guiding when to use the tool. It does not explicitly list alternatives, but the purpose clarity implicitly differentiates it from siblings.

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