x_repost_set

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

Beyond annotations, it discloses that this is a reversible engagement write, that the result reports the resulting reposted state, and that policy may disable it. This adds consequential behavioral context without contradicting readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, or destructiveHint=false.

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 purposeful sentences: the purpose is front-loaded, parameter semantics condensed, and behavioral/policy caveats appended. No filler or repetition.

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 two-parameter write operation with a full input schema and an output schema, the description covers the target, action, reversibility, result state, and policy limitation. Nothing needed for correct invocation 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the parameter descriptions already specify the numeric ID/URL format and enum values. The description restates these details but does not add meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description names a precise action ('repost (retweet) a post') and its inverse ('undo that repost'), tied to the authenticated user. This unambiguously differentiates it from sibling tools like x_post_create, x_like_set, and x_post_delete, which operate on different actions.

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?

It clearly states the operation is for toggling repost state, and notes the read-only policy disables it. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for other actions, but the context is sufficient for an agent to know when to select this tool.

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