publish_thread

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

With no annotations, the description needed to disclose behavioral traits but only states the obvious 'create and publish.' It omits details such as whether publishing is immediate, requires special permissions, has rate limits, or if there are irreversible effects. This is insufficient for a mutation 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, efficient sentence with no filler or redundancy. It earns its place and is appropriately sized.

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 tool has multiple related siblings and no output schema or annotations. The minimal description leaves significant gaps: no mention of return values, side effects, or relation to other publishing tools, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's role.

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 input schema already has 100% description coverage for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as how parameters interact or default behaviors.

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 states the action (create and publish) and the resource (a new thread), making the primary purpose obvious. However, it does not differentiate this from the sibling tool 'create_thread_chain', so it falls short of a 5.

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 alternatives like 'schedule_post' or 'create_thread_chain'. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or preferred scenarios, leaving the agent without decision support.

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