publish_job_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is idempotent and returns a durable job handle, which are useful behavioral traits. However, it does not explain side effects, prerequisites, or error conditions, leaving some ambiguity about the actual publish flow.

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 extremely concise, using two short sentences to convey the core purpose and key behavior. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or irrelevant 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 complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It fails to explain parameter usage, the expected return value beyond 'durable job handle', or any constraints on the input, leaving the agent with significant gaps in understanding how to use the tool correctly.

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 for its 8 parameters, and the description does not compensate. It only vaguely mentions 'final draft' without linking to specific parameters like draftId or markdown, providing no meaningful semantic guidance for the parameters.

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 a specific action: creating an idempotent publish job from a final draft. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like publish_job_run, publish_job_get, and publish_job_verify by focusing on creation and returning a durable handle.

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 phrase 'from a final draft' implies when this tool should be used, but there is no explicit guidance on alternatives or exclusions. Sibling tools are not referenced, and no conditions for choosing this over others are provided.

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