Create Block

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does reveal one important behavioral trait: local file paths are rejected and public URLs must be used. However, it does not mention mutability, reversibility, permissions, or what happens on invalid input.

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 with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the URL constraint is a necessary usage detail that earns its place.

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 8 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema-level parameter descriptions, this short description leaves significant gaps. An agent would still need more information about required parameter semantics, return behavior, and side effects.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It vaguely maps to 'value' by mentioning text/link/media and to 'channel_ids' by mentioning channels, but optional parameters like alt_text, insert_at, and description are left unexplained. The 8-parameter surface is largely unaddressed.

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 operation: create a text/link/media block and connect it to channels. This distinguishes create_block from siblings like create_channel and connect_block, since it covers both creation and initial channel connection.

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 implies when to use this tool: for creating a new block and connecting it to channels. It also provides a clear input prerequisite (public URLs, not local file paths), but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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