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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries real weight here: it discloses moderation (posts require coach approval before becoming visible) and confirm-gated preview behavior, both material for a write tool. The 'immediately — only after approval' phrasing is confusing about actual visibility timing, which is exactly the fact an agent most 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?

Two compact parenthetical-laden sentences, front-loaded with the action and the media provenance. The ambiguous visibility clause costs some clarity but nothing is padded.

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 gated mutation with no output schema, the description usefully covers approval gating and the confirm preview, but leaves the scope model (what ORGANIZATION vs COACH means, what scopeId refers to) entirely unexplained. An agent can call it, but not confidently target the right scope.

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 coverage is 50%: confirm and mediaKeys items are documented in the schema, and the description merely repeats both ('mediaKeys from upload_file', 'previews until confirm: true'). The undocumented fields — scopeType (ORGANIZATION vs COACH enum) and scopeId — receive no explanation in either place, so the description fails to compensate where it was needed.

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 ('Publish a community post') plus the media requirement, which clearly differentiates it from the sibling create_community_post (text only). The second sentence, 'Visible to every member immediately — only after the coach approves,' is internally contradictory and muddies the stated effect.

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?

It tells the agent the prerequisite that mediaKeys must come from upload_file, and implies the two-step preview/confirm usage. But it never names create_community_post as the text-only alternative, so the agent must infer when to pick this tool over its closest sibling.

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