update_post

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-readOnly, non-idempotent, non-destructive mutation. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: partial-update semantics, TikTok field-by-field merge versus replacement of other objects/arrays, the post.scheduled side effect, and the editable-status restriction.

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 front-loaded with the action, then adds constraints and semantics in a compact sequence. Every clause adds useful information about editability, merge behavior, or scheduling side effects, with no filler.

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 complex nested PATCH tool with 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the most important update semantics: allowed statuses, partial-update behavior, replacement rules, and scheduled_at transitions. It appropriately leaves detailed field rules to the schema, though it could say more about nested comment_auto_reply updates.

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 high at 82%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful meaning for key parameters, especially partial updates and the set/null behavior of scheduled_at, but does not clarify every parameter such as platform, post_type, or nested comment_auto_reply behavior.

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 the specific verb and resource ('Update a post') and immediately narrows editable states to draft, scheduled, or failed, with 409 not_editable otherwise. This distinguishes it from sibling post operations like create_post, publish_post, schedule_post, and unschedule_post.

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 says when editing is allowed and when it is not ('409 not_editable otherwise'). It also explains that only changed fields should be sent and how scheduled_at moves between scheduled and draft states, though it does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools.

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