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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the tool returns the new library item id, uses no credits, and triggers automatic content-pillar and funnel-stage tagging within a minute. It also clarifies that the selected hook becomes the chosen hook and comes first, which is useful behavioral context for a non-destructive write.

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-loaded, covering the two save paths before hook behavior, auto-tagging, the alternative tool, return value, and cost. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy.

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 five-parameter tool with no output schema, the description supplies the missing operational context: save modes, hook selection behavior, automatic tagging, return value, and credit cost. An agent has enough information to call it correctly without opening the schema.

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?

Although the schema has full parameter descriptions, the tool description adds meaningful semantics: draft_id and title/text/platform are alternative save modes, and hook may be either a number or text and affects ordering. This goes beyond the structured schema by explaining relationships between parameters.

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 names a specific verb and resource: saving a delivered draft or new creator text to the library. It clearly distinguishes the two save modes by draft_id versus title/text/platform, and separates itself from update_library_item, which edits library tags manually.

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 explains when to use each mode: pass draft_id to save a delivered draft, or provide title, text, and platform to save new text. It also tells the agent when to use update_library_item instead for manual tag changes.

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