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

Annotations already declare a write operation that reaches others (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true), but the description adds substantive detail beyond them: members are notified unless notify_members is false, default confirmation can be disabled, and a Cotlet API key with app access is required. These are real side-effect and auth disclosures the annotations don't carry.

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-loads the core action well, but the confirmation idea is stated twice ('By default you confirm each call' and 'confirm with the user before each call'), which is redundant. Otherwise lean.

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?

For a publish tool with no output schema, it covers the essential behavioral facts: the notification side effect, the confirmation policy, and the auth requirement. Nothing critical for a correct call 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 description coverage is 100%, so post_id and notify_members are already documented. The description echoes the notify_members default semantics ('Members are notified unless notify_members is false'), adding minor reinforcement but no new syntax or format detail beyond the schema baseline.

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+resource ('Publish a draft now') and clarifies the immediate scope ('immediately to its audience'). This implicitly separates it from siblings like create_post or schedule_post, though it never names them explicitly, so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

Gives real context about confirmation behavior ('confirm each call... switch that off') and the fact that the action reaches other people. However, it never routes the agent between this tool and the closely related create_post, schedule_post, or update_post siblings, leaving when-to-use inferred.

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