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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the post is queued (not immediate), that the browser extension picks it up, that a jobId is returned, and that polling is required. It also details the media upload prerequisite. This is comprehensive transparency for an asynchronous operation.

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 a single paragraph but well-structured: it starts with the core purpose, then explains the return value and polling, and finally the media upload step. It is concise without being terse, and every sentence adds necessary information. It could be slightly more scannable, but it is efficient.

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 complexity (5 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description covers the essential flow: queueing, polling, media handling, and return values. It lacks explicit error-handling or edge-case guidance, but it provides enough for an agent to call the tool and interpret results correctly. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the description of jobId and postUrl.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It covers text, platform, and mediaPaths (via the upload flow), but it does not mention idempotencyKey or platformPayload. These parameters are left unexplained, which is a gap for an agent trying to use them correctly. The description adds value for some parameters but not all.

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 tool's function: 'Queues a social post for the user.' It specifies the resource (social post) and the action (queue), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_reddit_comment by focusing on social posts. The mention of the browser extension and jobId further clarifies its unique purpose.

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 provides explicit workflow instructions: poll get_post_status with the jobId until a terminal status, and call get_upload_url first for media. It clearly tells the agent when to use this tool and how to chain it with siblings, leaving no ambiguity about the required follow-up steps.

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