devto_publish_article

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait that publishing makes the article publicly visible immediately, which is valuable. However, it does not mention authorization requirements, failure behavior for non-draft ids, or whether the operation can be reversed.

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 concise and front-loaded: it states the action first, then the consequence, and then the design rationale. Each sentence earns its place and the rationale directly supports tool selection.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does, its immediate effect, and why it is separated from a sibling. It could mention the reverse operation or expected response, but the essentials are present.

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 only parameter id is described as 'The draft's article id.' The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource: publish an existing draft, and clarifies the immediate effect (publicly visible). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from devto_update_article, which helps an agent identify the intended tool without confusion.

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 explains why this tool exists as a separate action from devto_update_article, giving a clear reason to prefer it for publishing. It does not explicitly mention when to use devto_unpublish_article as the reverse operation, but the context is otherwise clear.

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