create_post

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

There are no annotations to lean on, so the description carries the full transparency load. It discloses major side effects: publishing to the website, auto-uploading images via URL or Base64, and sending push notifications to subscribers. It does not mention public visibility className or error behavior, but the core publishing side effects are covered.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence names the action and target; the second summarizes automatic side effects. It is tightly scoped and easy to parse quickly.

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?

The description covers the main flow: publishing, image upload, and notification. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it does not mention return values or clarify that sendNotification defaults to true and can be disabled. These details are important for agent decision-making even if the schema describes the parameter, so the description is only partially complete.

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%, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate. The description only summarizes 'image uploads (URL or Base64)' and does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides for imageBase64 or thumbnailUrl. No parameter is misleading, but the description does not compensate beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states 'Publish a new AI Prompt post/guide to the AR LABS website,' which identifies the action, resource, and destination clearly. The word 'new' strongly distinguishes it from sibling update_post, and the overall intent is distinct from list/get/delete posts.

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 clearly communicates that image uploads and OneSignal push notifications are handled automatically, signaling that creators do not need to call upload_image or send_push_notification separately. It does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for editing existing posts), but the 'new' keyword and sibling context make the intended use fairly clear.

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