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

The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond the annotations: it sets status to PUBLISH, records today as publish date, registers with the Google indexer, clears website list caches, and scopes access to the caller's merchant. These are important side effects for a destructive, non-idempotent, open-world mutation.

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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence that states the action, identifiers, side effects, and scope without waste. It is appropriately sized for the tool.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral context an agent needs: what changes, external indexing, cache clearing, and merchant scoping. It could be more complete by clarifying identifier selection or error conditions, but the core operational picture is present.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It names both parameters and indicates that either collection_id or collection_uuid can identify the collection, which is useful. It does not explain format differences, precedence, or whether exactly one is required despite both being optional in the schema.

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 uses a specific verb, publish, and a specific resource, seliee_collection, and explicitly distinguishes it from sibling publish tools for pages, articles, ads, social posts, etc. It also names the two identifier fields, making the action immediately identifiable.

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 context is clear: use this to publish a collection. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use collection_id versus collection_uuid, no prerequisites, and no comparison to alternatives such as edit_collection or create_collection.

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