docs_insert_before

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

With no annotations, the description takes on the burden of behavior and does so well: it discloses case-insensitive substring matching, the default rich formatting behavior, and how to opt into literal text with rich=False. It does not specify behavior when multiple paragraphs contain the anchor or when no match is found, which is a minor but real gap.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the operation, the matching rule, and the formatting default. There is no fluff or repetition of schema fields.

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 essential invocation details are covered, and since an output schema exists, return values need no explanation. The only missing context is edge-case behavior for unmatched or multiple matching anchors, which an agent would benefit from knowing.

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 already covers 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful meaning beyond the schema by explaining how `anchor` is matched (case-insensitive substring) and what `rich` controls (formatting mode and the default).

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Insert a new paragraph immediately before the paragraph containing `anchor`.' This states both the operation and its placement, and the word 'before' differentiates it from siblings like docs_insert_after and docs_append.

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 placement constraint 'immediately before the paragraph containing anchor' clearly tells an agent when this tool is appropriate, and the substring matching rule sets expectations about how the target is located. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as docs_insert_after, so it stops short of a full when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement.

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