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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (write operation) and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces write behavior with 'publish' but adds no new behavioral context such as permissions, rate limits, or side effects. It is adequate but does not exceed what annotations provide.

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?

Two concise sentences front-loading the purpose and constraint. Every word earns its place; no unnecessary detail.

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 tool's simplicity (1 param, no output schema), the description covers the core action and precondition. It does not mention return value or confirmation, but for a simple publish action, this is mostly sufficient. Slight room for improvement to describe expected outcome.

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% with the parameter fully described. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the action 'publish' on 'draft post', and adds the condition that only draft status posts can be published. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'post_publish' which likely targets non-draft posts, and 'post_update' which doesn't change status.

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 explicitly says 'Only posts with draft status can be published using this endpoint', providing clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not mention alternatives for non-draft posts or explicitly state when not to use this tool, missing a small opportunity to direct users to sibling tools.

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