supportpages_finalize_article

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive write operation. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that, including the required success condition and the rule against finalizing interrupted generations, though it does not discuss permissions or side effects in more detail.

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 three tight sentences with no filler, and the core action is front-loaded. Each sentence adds a distinct operational constraint.

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 finalization tool with an output schema, the description covers the key preconditions, the completed=true constraint, and the interrupted-generation prohibition. The omission of section_id guidance is the main remaining gap.

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 only 25%, with artifact_dir being the sole parameter described in the schema. The description compensates for completed (must be true) and run_id (required for prepared runs), but it says nothing about section_id, leaving one parameter's semantics unexplained.

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 a specific verb ('Snapshot') and resource ('successfully completed article for upload'), making the operation clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as complete_article or upload_draft, but the purpose is still easy to infer.

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?

It gives explicit timing conditions: set completed=true only after the full skill pipeline succeeds, or after reviewing an existing finished article. It also states a clear prohibition ('Never finalize interrupted generation') and a prerequisite for prepared runs ('require their run_id').

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