share_linkedin_post

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions the sharing action and attachment options but does not state that the post is public, that it is irreversible, whether authentication is required, or what happens on failure (e.g., invalid image URL).

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 or redundancy. It efficiently captures the core action and the main optional content types in just a few words.

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 mutation tool with six parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is thin on operational context. It omits important guidance about when to choose this tool over the sibling, what side effects to expect, and what a successful invocation returns.

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?

The schema already documents all six parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some value by grouping the image options (URL, prompt, Nano Banana) and article link, but it does not substantially deepen understanding of the parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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 clearly identifies the action ('Share a new post on LinkedIn') and the resource, with specific attachment options. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling 'generate_and_share_linkedin_post', so there is minor ambiguity in tool selection.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the closely related 'generate_and_share_linkedin_post', nor does it explain exclusions, prerequisites, or which tool should be chosen for AI-generated post content. The usage context is left entirely to inference.

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