Schedule an article

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

The description goes beyond annotations by disclosing concrete behavioral details: the status change, cron timing, public visibility on the live site, and the confirmation requirement. It also clarifies independence from the AI pipeline. This provides substantial context that annotations alone do not convey.

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 with the primary action. Each sentence adds necessary information: action, status change, cron behavior, public warning, confirmation guard, and auth requirement. No fluff or redundancy.

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 description is complete for a scheduling tool: it covers the action, timing, visibility consequence, user consent, and auth prerequisites. With no output schema or additional complexities, the description provides all essential context.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add much beyond the schema for parameters; it reiterates the confirm requirement but does not explain id or scheduled_publish_at beyond what the schema already describes. The auth scope note is not a parameter semantic.

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 clearly states the tool's function: scheduling an article by moving it to 'status: scheduled' and recording the go-live time. It distinguishes the deferred publication via cron from immediate publishing by explicitly noting the cron behavior and the public visibility implication.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool (for scheduling future publication) and includes a strong prerequisite: asking the user and passing confirm: true only after agreement. It also states the required auth scope. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like publish_article or cancel_article_schedule, so it falls short of a full 5.

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