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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it discloses that the post is saved inactive and nobody sees it until activation, that categories must pre-exist (a failure condition), that an API key with app access is required, and that the call runs without a confirmation prompt. That is meaningful behavioral context an agent needs.

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 lead sentence is well front-loaded, but the 'saved inactive' fact is stated twice in slightly different words, and the Cotlet API key sentence sits awkwardly at the end. Trimming the duplication would tighten it without losing information.

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 write tool with no output schema, it covers the key behavioral facts (inactive state, activation path, prerequisite categories). It does not mention what the call returns, notably the post ID presumably needed to feed activate_blog_post, which is a minor gap.

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 the schema already documents all seven parameters. The description restates the field set and adds only the 'categories must already exist' constraint and the title-derived path default, which the schema also notes, so it adds marginal value.

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 and resource (create a blog post) plus the content source (Markdown), and names the exact fields it populates. The distinction from the sibling activate_blog_post is clear because the description explains this creates while that one activates.

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?

Explains the activation workflow and points at activate_blog_post as the next step, and warns that categories must already exist. It does not explicitly compare against other create-style siblings or state when-not to use this tool, but the relevant context is given.

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