Create a post (staged)

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

The description goes beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) by detailing the staging behavior: it validates attachments, builds a preview, and returns a confirmation_token. It also discloses that nothing is published and that user approval is required before confirm_action. These are significant behavioral traits not present in the structured annotations.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds meaningful context (staging, no publish, validation/preview/token, approval flow). There is no redundant repetition of schema or annotations, making it highly efficient.

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 lacking an output schema, the description explains the key return value (confirmation_token) and the workflow (preview then confirm). It covers the tool's main behavioral contract, including the validation step and the explicit requirement for user approval. The sibling tools include confirm_action, which the description correctly references as the follow-up, making the tool's role in the overall flow complete.

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%, so the baseline for this dimension is 3. The description adds valuable semantics by stating 'optionally with one local image or video', which clarifies that image_path and video_path are mutually exclusive—a nuance not enforced by the schema. It does not discuss require_confirmation, but the schema already covers that. This added nuance justifies a score above baseline.

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 opens with 'Stage a new post on your own timeline', which is a specific verb ('stage') and resource ('post on your own timeline'). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like post_comment (commenting) and share_post (sharing) by emphasizing the staging aspect. The phrase 'does NOT publish anything' further disambiguates it from a direct publishing tool.

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 description explicitly states when to use the tool: to stage a post for later confirmation. It provides a clear when-not ('does NOT publish anything') and a direct next-step action ('call confirm_action only after explicit approval'). This is explicit guidance beyond a vague context.

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