dl_object_publish

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, non-idempotent and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: the publish must originate from a verified saved revision, and it also reads the published branch afterward. It omits what gets overwritten, auth requirements, and error behavior for stale revisions.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the verb and subject with no filler. It is appropriately sized, though it sacrifices detail for brevity given the undocumented parameters.

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, non-idempotent mutation on a nested target array with five undocumented sub-fields and no output schema, the description is too thin. It gives the high-level contract but leaves the agent without enough detail to construct correct target entries.

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 compensate and does not. It alludes to the saved/published branch concept, but never explains object_type, object_id, revision_id, expected_saved_revision, or operation_id, leaving the nested target structure largely opaque.

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 (publish) and resource (chart or dashboard objects), plus the source constraint (fresh verified saved revision). It reads as the only publish operation among siblings, though it doesn't name them for contrast. Clear enough for an agent to select it.

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?

'Only from a fresh verified saved revision' is a genuine precondition that tells the agent when this tool is appropriate. However, there is no guidance on when to use alternatives (e.g., dl_object_update or dl_object_create) or what to do when no fresh saved revision exists.

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