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

It discloses that the call either publishes immediately or schedules, and explains the media URN format constraints, which adds behavioral detail beyond the annotations. It stops short of discussing permissions, rate limits, or post visibility effects, but the readOnlyHint=false annotation already flags that this mutates external state.

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 three sentences with the core action front-loaded and every sentence contributing useful specifics (media URN types, scheduling behavior). No filler or redundant restating of parameter names.

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?

Given the rich 100%-coverage schema and existing output schema, the description covers the important non-obvious choices: media URN sourcing and schedule vs. publish-now. It does not explicitly mention the upload_media_from_url prerequisite for a brand-new asset, but the reference to create_multi_photo partially covers the media workflow.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description adds value by clarifying the exact accepted media_urn formats (digitalmediaAsset vs fsd_multiPhoto) and how scheduled_at toggles scheduling. This complements rather than repeats 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 uses a specific verb pair ('Create or schedule') with a clear object ('a LinkedIn post') and immediately clarifies the optional media attachment. It also differentiates itself from media-creation siblings by referencing create_multi_photo as the source of multi-image URNs.

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 gives concrete usage context: single vs. multiple image URNs, scheduling via scheduled_at, and immediate publishing when omitted. It could be stronger by naming alternatives like update_scheduled_post, but the workflow guidance is clear enough for correct invocation.

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