x_api_repost_post

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully discloses behavioral traits. It clearly states 'Risk: mutating, high-risk' and 'Safety warnings: This mutates X state,' plus required OAuth scopes, environment-selection behavior, common failure conditions, and expected response shape. This is comprehensive behavioral transparency.

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?

The description is structured with useful labeled sections and front-loaded with the purpose. It is somewhat lengthy but each section adds value. Minor redundancy exists (e.g., 'Use when: Repost Post' and risk repeating safety warnings), but overall it is organized and not excessively verbose.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers auth, environment selection, failure modes, expected response, and even an example. Missing details about the body payload and preferredAuthType, but the provided context is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool with caution.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains scopeTenantId, scopeUserId, scopeAccountId, and credentialKey via environment-selection behavior, and id as required path. However, body is only described as 'documented request payload' with no detail, and authorizationKey/preferredAuthType are not explained. Partial coverage leaves gaps.

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 states 'Repost Post.' which is a clear verb+resource action. It distinguishes from siblings like x_api_unrepost_post and x_api_create_posts, though it doesn't elaborate on what 'repost' entails (e.g., creates a retweet). The purpose is specific enough to guide selection.

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 explicit 'Do not use when' guidance with alternatives (x_schema_discovery, x_query_suggestion) and a list of recommended prerequisite/follow-up tools. However, the 'Use when: Repost Post' is tautological and doesn't add usage context. Overall, it gives clear direction on when to avoid this tool.

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