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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a destructive, far-reaching mutation. The description's 'take it offline across all pages' adds scope context beyond the annotations. It does not say whether content is preserved, whether this is reversible, or permission requirements – worth noting but partially covered by 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?

Single crisp sentence, front-loaded verb, parenthetical qualifier adds scope without waste.

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?

Adequate for a simple two-param mutation with full schema coverage and destructive annotations. Missing explicit state preconditions (must be currently published) and reversibility for a destructive operation, which an agent deciding whether to call would benefit from.

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% with both params documented, so schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what's already structured; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb (unpublish) and resource (partial), and the parenthetical clarifies that it affects all pages. It is distinguishable from siblings like unpublish_page and delete_page, though not explicitly contrasted.

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?

Usage is implied by the operation itself but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance, no mention of preceding state (must be published), and no distinction from unpublish_page beyond the resource.

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