Crosspost message

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds targeting context but no additional behavioral details such as permission requirements, rate limits, or failure scenarios. This is acceptable given annotations, but not richly transparent.

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 a single, well-structured sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the verb and immediately communicates the action and scope.

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?

The tool is simple with a clear purpose and no output schema. The description completely explains the action and target. It could mention prerequisites like the need for the channel to be an announcement channel, but that is already embedded in the phrase 'announcement channel', making it sufficiently 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 67% (channel and guild are described, message_id is not). The description does not add parameter-specific details, but the missing message_id is self-explanatory from context. The description provides marginal value beyond the schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'Publish' with a clear resource ('a message in an announcement channel') and target ('every server that follows it'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like send_message or forward_message, which operate on regular channels or direct targets.

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 clearly implies when to use it: when you want to broadcast a message from an announcement channel to all following servers. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls slightly short of explicit usage guidance.

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