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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers: a paid-plan prerequisite, asynchronous background execution, the immediate PUBLISHING return status, the recommended follow-up delay ('a minute or two'), and host-specific panel behavior including a directive not to duplicate panel contents. This is unusually complete behavioral disclosure.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scope before the operational details. Each sentence carries distinct information, though the two app-capable-host sentences overlap slightly and could be merged without loss.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain returns — and it does, stating the tool returns PUBLISHING immediately and where to look for per-account results. Prerequisites, async behavior, and error recovery are all covered.

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?

Only one parameter exists and the schema documents none of it, but postId is self-evident from the name. The description adds real meaning by constraining the target to a DRAFT or SCHEDULED post, implying posts in other states are invalid input.

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 (publish) and resource (a DRAFT or SCHEDULED post) and clarifies the semantics: publish now rather than waiting for the schedule. This distinguishes it cleanly from siblings like create_post, update_post, and retry_post.

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 says when to use it (publish a draft/scheduled post immediately), when not to act (don't poll get_post in app-capable hosts), and names the alternatives (get_post to check results, retry_post for failures). Routing guidance is fully specified.

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