moltbook_upvote

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Upvote' implies a mutation, but nothing is said about idempotency, whether repeat calls are deduplicated, how to undo the vote, or what auth/rate limits apply to this state-changing call.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the verb and object front-loaded and zero waste. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the source of the missing behavioral detail.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no disclosure of permissions, idempotency, or error behavior, the definition is too thin for an agent to call it confidently beyond the happy path.

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 description coverage is 100% and the enum for 'type' is self-documenting, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema — it merely restates that the target may be a post or comment.

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 (upvote) and the two target resources (post or comment), so the action is unambiguous. It doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from any sibling, though 'upvote' is inherently distinct from moltbook_post/moltbook_comment, which create content.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as craber_vote. The usage is inferable from the name alone, but the description itself provides none of it.

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