Publish Ghost posts

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

Annotations already flag destructive/non-idempotent/open-world, and the description adds substantial non-obvious behavior: the deploy hook fires exactly once only after complete success, the operation is version-checked, and newsletter email is never sent. These side-effect disclosures go well beyond the annotations and directly inform safe invocation.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences with no filler: action first, then side-effect guarantees, then the negative guarantee about newsletters. Every clause adds decision-relevant information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description covers gating, atomicity of the deploy hook, and the newsletter exclusion. It stops short of clarifying partial-failure behavior or whether the batch is all-or-nothing, which matters for a destructive multi-item operation.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden. It explains user_confirmed as a gate and hints that entries are version-checked (implying updated_at is used for optimistic concurrency), but it never explains the posts array shape, the 24-hex id format, or the 25-item cap already visible in 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Publish Ghost posts") and qualifies the scope as an "exact, version-checked batch," which cleanly separates it from publish_pages, unpublish_posts, and schedule_posts. An agent can identify the action and its 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 precondition ("after user_confirmed=true") that defines the context for invocation, which is meaningful for a terminal publish action. It does not, however, name alternatives such as schedule_posts or apply_change_set, so routing among siblings is left to inference.

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