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

The description declares 'No writes, no notifications, no actions', aligning with annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint). It adds specifics about processing up to 200 posts and 200 comments, going beyond annotations.

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 concise with three sentences, directly stating the purpose, scope, and relation to a sibling tool. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 description covers the key aspects: purpose, non-destructive nature, scope limit, and linkage to create rule. While it does not detail the output schema, that is present separately, so the description is sufficiently complete.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that 'actions' are validated but never executed, and 'triggers' use same keys as the create rule, providing extra context beyond the 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 that the tool previews what a rule config would match against recent content, emphasizing it is a dry-run. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'colony_create_automod_rule' by noting it is a sanity check before creation.

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 description explicitly states the tool is for previewing before using 'colony_create_automod_rule', providing clear when-to-use guidance. It also implies not to use it for actual rule creation, differentiating from the sibling tool.

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