publish_post

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states that it returns a tracking ID for progress monitoring, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., what happens if the draft is already published), required permissions, or error behavior. This is adequate but not thorough.

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: two sentences and an example. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, and every part is informative without redundancy.

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 has 4 parameters, a nested object, and no output schema, the description is somewhat minimal. It mentions the return of a tracking ID but does not specify the output structure or error scenarios. It covers the main use case but lacks depth for a complete understanding.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described. The description adds no additional semantic information beyond the schema (e.g., format, constraints). The example mentions 'draft' and 'Twitter', which aligns with post_id and platforms, but does not enhance meaning.

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 ('existing Social0 draft'), and the scope ('immediately to connected platforms'). It also provides an example query, which reinforces understanding. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'schedule_post' or 'publish_now'.

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 implies use for drafts that need immediate publication, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'publish_now' or 'schedule_post'. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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