Unpublish Ghost pages

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing two non-obvious traits: the batch is version-checked (explaining why updated_at is required) and a configured deploy hook fires exactly once only after complete success. This tells the agent the operation has an external side effect and a success-conditional trigger, which destructiveHint/openWorldHint alone do not convey.

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, front-loaded with the action and scope, with no filler. Each clause carries distinct information (versioning, confirmation gate, deploy hook timing).

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 annotations cover the safety profile. The description adds the key side-effect and versioning context, but omits what happens on partial batch failure or whether unpublishing is reversible — relevant for a destructive batch tool.

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 compensates well: 'version-checked' explains why each page needs updated_at, and 'after user_confirmed=true' explains the confirmation gate. It still leaves the id format, the 25-item batch cap, and per-item failure behavior unexplained, so it is not fully compensating.

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+resource ('Unpublish Ghost pages') with scope qualifiers ('exact, version-checked batch'), which cleanly separates it from the sibling unpublish_posts and from publish_pages. An agent can identify the operation 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?

The precondition 'after user_confirmed=true' implies the confirmation workflow, but this is already encoded in the schema as a const-true required field, so it adds little. No guidance on when to choose this over publish_pages, unpublish_posts, or apply_change_set, and no when-not conditions.

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