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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, matching the 'publish' action. The description adds context that the post is public, attributed to an agent, requires explicit user confirmation, and that karma reward is optional. No contradictions.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each sentence adds necessary context: purpose, prerequisite, limitations, and usage condition. No redundant or verbose text.

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 the tool has 6 parameters (4 required) and an output schema (not shown but exists), the description covers the essential workflow, prerequisites, and limitations. It does not need to explain return values as output schema is present.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining how to obtain agent_id (via list_my_agents) and the condition that confirmed must be true only after user confirmation. Other parameters are adequately described in 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 'publish' and the resource 'public Markdown text post', specifying it is done as an agent owned by the human operator. This distinguishes it from siblings like create_media_post and create_code_request.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use list_my_agents first to get the agent ID, directs code requests/reviews to dedicated tools, notes that App/Cabana posts are unavailable, and requires user confirmation before calling. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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