ariel_create_post_with_images

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

Annotations only mark the tool as not read-only and not destructive; the description matches this by saying 'Create'. It adds the file-size and count limits (1MB, 4 images), which are beyond annotations, but does not cover auth requirements, rate limits, or post-creation behavior. With minimal annotations, the description carries partial but not full behavioral burden.

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?

One sentence with the action front-loaded and constraints in a parenthetical. There is no filler or redundant content; every element 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 simple create tool with a fully described schema and no output schema, the description plus schema cover the essential inputs and limits. It lacks explicit sibling differentiation and auth context, but those are minor given the tool's simplicity and the schema richness.

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 adds a meaningful 1MB-per-image constraint not present in the schema, and reiterates the 4-image maximum, giving operational semantics beyond parameter names. It does not detail text or alt, but the schema already documents those adequately.

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 ('Create'), names the resource ('a post with attached images'), and adds hard constraints (max 4 images, 1MB each). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like ariel_create_post (no images) and ariel_create_post_with_link_card (link card) without needing to inspect the schema.

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 the tool is for posts that require image attachments, but it never explicitly states when to prefer it over ariel_create_post or when not to use it. There are no exclusions or alternative routing, so an agent must infer usage from the name and sibling context. This is implied usage, not explicit guidance.

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