publish_to_meta

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not disclose that publishing is immediate and irreversible, may require authenticated connections, or what the result/confirmation looks like. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 concise sentences: the first states the core function, the second gives the usage trigger. There is no fluff, and the essential information is front-loaded.

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?

While the schema documents parameters well, the description omits critical behavioral context for a publishing tool: side effects (immediate public post, irreversibility), prerequisites (connected accounts), and expected return value. This makes the description incomplete for an agent to safely anticipate the tool's outcomes.

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 covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions for media_url, platforms, and caption. The description adds workflow context (approved variant) but does not add parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action (publish), the resource (image or video), and the target platforms (Instagram and/or Facebook). It also ties the tool to a specific workflow step (after client approval from assemble_image_ad), distinguishing it from scheduling or drafting tools.

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 description provides an explicit when-to-use condition: 'Use after a client approves an image ad variant from assemble_image_ad.' This gives clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use the tool or compare it with immediate siblings like publish_now or schedule_post, so it stops short of a 5.

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