create_post

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It clearly states the non-obvious default of saving as drafts and requiring manual approval, and that nothing publishes automatically unless schedule_directly is true with a future scheduled_time. This is significant behavioral context that directly impacts how an agent should invoke the tool.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by the crucial default behavior and a prerequisite. Every sentence carries meaningful information with no filler or 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?

The tool has 10 parameters and no output schema, but the description covers the most critical operational details: draft-by-default, manual approval, and the condition for direct scheduling. Combined with the thorough per-parameter schema descriptions, this is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly, though it does not state what the tool returns.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description's mention of using list_accounts is helpful but duplicates the schema's description for account_ids. Per the rubric, baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high, and the description adds only minimal extra value beyond the schema.

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 opens with 'Create a post in Posthive', a specific verb+resource statement that clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like update_post, delete_post, or list_templates. It further clarifies the key behavior of creating drafts by default, which sets expectations for what 'create' means in this context.

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 explicitly instructs to 'Use list_accounts to get valid account IDs before calling this tool', providing a clear prerequisite for correct usage. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context of creating a new post is clear from the tool name and sibling list, and the scheduling behavior guidance helps decide when to use schedule_directly.

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