Operator: Post Reviews

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

Annotations provide only a title, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the required CIVITAE_ADMIN_KEY, that list is read-only, that approve/reject are permanent write operations, and that both actions are logged in the audit trail. This is strong behavioral disclosure.

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 first line front-loads the core purpose, followed by auth, workflow context, effects, and sibling routing in a logical order. The repetition about read-only vs. permanent write operations earns its place by emphasizing important side effects.

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?

Covers purpose, prerequisites, review-queue behavior, permanence, audit logging, and when to use sibling operator tools. An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required in the description; nothing essential appears missing.

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 schema already documents defaults, that post_id is required for approve/reject, and that reason is optional for reject and ignored for approve. The description reinforces the action modes but adds little beyond the schema, 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 exactly what it does: 'manage the post review queue (list, approve, or reject posts).' The verb and resource are specific, and the Operator-only scope separates it from non-operator civitae tools.

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?

Explains the context clearly: new marketplace posts enter a review queue before becoming visible, and the tool is the way to list, approve, or reject them. It also explicitly names alternatives: 'Use civitae_op_stakes for stake management... civitae_op_audit for audit log queries, or civitae_op_stats for platform dashboard stats.'

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