ig_publish_video

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Publish a video' and gives no detail on side effects, permissions, rate limits, processing behavior, or response. This is a significant gap for a mutating tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently conveys the action, target, and possible modes. Every word earns its place.

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 relatively simple tool (3 flat parameters, 1 required), the description is minimally viable: it states the purpose and lists the media types, and the schema covers the required URL. However, with no annotations and no output schema, an agent still lacks information about response behavior, side effects, and account prerequisites beyond 'connected'.

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 only 33% (only video_url has a schema description). The description adds minimal parameter meaning by listing the three media types, which roughly maps to the media_type enum, but it does not clarify the caption parameter or add any semantics beyond what the enum and video_url schema already provide.

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 ('Publish') with a clear resource ('a video') and target ('connected Instagram account'), and explicitly names the three output modes ('Reel, feed video, or Story'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like ig_publish_photo and ig_publish_carousel by the resource type, and from fb_* tools by the platform.

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 implies its usage: publish a video to Instagram in one of three formats. However, it does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives (e.g., ig_publish_photo, graph_api_request), provide exclusions, or mention prerequisites such as the account being connected.

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