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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds the action (move article) and date format, but no additional context like auth needs, what happens to the previous schedule, or rate limits.

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?

A single efficient sentence with zero waste, front-loading the core action and date format.

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 mutating tool with 3 parameters and sparse schema, the description is too minimal. It omits usage guidance, does not explain the required 'id' parameter, and provides no output or side-effect context beyond what annotations already state.

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 coverage is only 33% (only workspaceId has a description). The description clarifies the date format as YYYY-MM-DD, but the required 'id' parameter remains completely undocumented, and no other param details are added.

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 states a specific verb (Move) and resource (article) and gives the date format. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not differentiate from siblings like unschedule_post or schedule_entry, and 'article' vs the tool name 'post' may cause slight confusion.

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?

No when-to-use guidance or alternatives are provided. The description does not indicate when to choose reschedule_post over unschedule_post, schedule_entry, or upsert_post.

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