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

Annotations already establish that this is not read-only and is not idempotent. The description adds useful context by indicating it publishes a previously prepared video and is panel-initiated. However, it does not disclose consequences such as irreversibility, side effects, or required authentication/authorization beyond the token parameter.

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 two sentences with no filler. The main action is stated first, and the critical 'never by the model' constraint is front-loaded in the second sentence.

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 tool the model is explicitly told never to call, the description provides enough context to prevent misuse and to explain when the panel would invoke it. Missing details like prerequisites and return behavior are less critical because the model is barred from direct invocation.

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%, and the description gives no parameter-level guidance. It only refers generically to 'settings the person chose in the publish panel,' which does not help an agent understand the token, visibility, tags, or boolean fields. For 13 parameters, this is a significant gap.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it 'Posts a video prepared by publish_asset' using settings from the publish panel. It clearly differentiates this tool from its sibling publish_asset by framing it as the final confirmation step rather than the preparation step.

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?

Explicitly states when it is used: 'Called by the panel when they press Post.' It also gives a strong exclusion: 'never by the model.' This leaves no ambiguity about when the agent should invoke it versus avoid it.

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