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

Annotations already mark the call as mutating and idempotent; the description adds consent-based guardrails ('only when explicitly asked', 'do not call immediately') and the mandatory nextSteps-handling behavior. It does not describe what happens to a previously published revision, but the output schema covers response content.

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 with zero filler: purpose, trigger condition, exclusion, anonymous-token rule, and response handling. Front-loaded with purpose and each subsequent sentence earns its place.

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?

Even with a small schema and output schema present, the description provides all operational context an agent needs: when to call, when not, how to handle anonymous pages, and what to do with nextSteps. Nothing crucial is missing.

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 covers both parameters at 100%, so the baseline is met. The description adds meaningful provenance and condition for editToken (required for anonymous demo pages, returned by page_create), which is exactly the kind of extra context needed.

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?

States the core action with a specific verb ('Publish') and resource ('latest page revision'), and separates it from page_unpublish and page_preview. The mention of 'make the page live' reinforces the intent. This clearly identifies what the tool does without relying solely on the title.

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 conditions invocation on the user's latest message expressing publish/live/share-link intent and prohibits auto-calling after page_create or page_create_from_brief. This removes ambiguity against siblings and sets a clear trigger rule.

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