Publish Ghost pages

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

Annotations already flag destructive/openWorld/non-idempotent, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: version-checked optimistic concurrency and a deploy hook that fires exactly once only after complete success. It does not spell out what happens on a version mismatch or partial failure, which keeps it from a 5.

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 tight sentences with the confirmation gate and the deploy-hook side effect front-loaded. No filler or repetition of the title.

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 dangerous, open-world mutation with an output schema available separately, the description covers the critical safety-relevant facts: the confirmation gate, the version check, and the exactly-once side effect. Return values are handled by the output schema, so nothing essential is missing.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must carry the load; it hints at the pages array ('batch'), the version field ('version-checked'), and the confirmation flag. It omits the 25-item cap, the 24-hex id format, and the required updated_at on each item, so the two parameters remain only partially explained.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Publish Ghost pages') scoped as an 'exact, version-checked batch', which cleanly separates it from the sibling publish_posts and the single-page drafts tools. An agent can identify the operation and its batching nature without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a clear prerequisite: the call only applies after user_confirmed=true, and frames it as a batch operation. It stops short of naming alternatives (e.g., publish_posts vs publish_pages, or trigger_deploy for the hook alone), so no explicit when-not guidance.

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