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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, destructive operation, and the description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: public link exposure, embed URLs, account requirement, and the SEO caveat. It does not fully explain side effects such as whether existing embeds break on unpublish, but it is substantially more informative than the annotations alone.

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 compact and front-loads the main action and inverse action. Every sentence contributes useful information about outputs, account requirements, or SEO behavior.

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?

For a two-parameter publishing toggle with no output schema, the description is complete enough: it explains the public/private outcomes, mentions the resulting public and embed URLs, and notes the account requirement and SEO limitation.

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 description coverage is 100%, and both parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description reinforces the `publish` boolean semantics but adds little beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: publish a market map, and clearly covers the inverse action of making it private again. It also distinguishes the public-link/embed outcome from related map operations such as creating or editing.

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?

It explicitly states how to use the tool in both directions: publish with `publish: true` or make private with `publish: false`. It gives useful context such as being free, requiring an account, and not automatically placing the page in search engines, though it does not name sibling alternatives.

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