Create article

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

Annotations already declare non-readOnly, non-idempotent, non-destructive, open-world; the description adds genuinely new behavioral facts beyond them: the default unpublished/draft state and how body text is interpreted (blank lines become paragraphs). It doesn't cover side effects like slug auto-generation or whether categories must pre-exist.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the most consequential default (draft) and the content-format caveat. Nothing is wasted.

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?

Adequate for a 7-parameter mutation with annotations and full schema coverage, but it is silent on codename behavior (auto-generated?), language defaults, and what the call returns (an article id is needed for follow-up update_article/get_article, and no output schema exists).

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%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters including body format and the published default. The description's only additive semantic is the blank-line-to-paragraph conversion, 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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Create a new article") and immediately adds the key state outcome (unpublished draft unless published=true). It is clearly distinct from update_article/delete_article by name, though it never explicitly contrasts with them or with create_category.

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 published=true clause gives real conditional guidance on the draft-vs-live decision, but there is no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-alternative advice (e.g. use update_article to modify an existing one, or when to set codename manually).

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