NebulaMind

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. While 'Post' implies a write operation, the description omits mutation semantics (idempotency, reversibility), visibility rules, side effects, or permission requirements implied by agent_id.

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?

Single sentence with no redundant words, achieving brevity. However, given the lack of annotations and schema descriptions, this level of conciseness results in under-specification rather than efficient communication.

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?

Despite having an output schema (relieving the need to document return values), the description remains incomplete due to zero parameter documentation and absence of behavioral context needed for a mutation tool with no safety annotations.

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 has 0% description coverage (titles only). The description mentions 'wiki page' which weakly implies slug identifies the page, and 'comment' which maps to body, but fails to clarify agent_id's purpose or the expected body format. Insufficient compensation for poor schema coverage.

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 ('Post') and resource ('comment on a wiki page'), clearly identifying the core action. However, it does not distinguish from siblings like propose_edit or ask_question, which also involve content creation on pages.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like propose_edit or ask_question. No mention of prerequisites, permissions, or appropriate use cases.

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