Create Promotion Task

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

The description goes beyond annotations by detailing resource consumption (points and daily slot) and auto-detection of platform from URL. No contradictions with annotations. It could mention more about idempotency or failure modes.

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 very concise with five sentences, each serving a purpose: purpose, resource consumption, reference to another tool, auto-detection, and minimum requirements. No wasted 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?

The description covers key aspects like resource usage and platform detection but lacks return value explanation and details on daily slot. Given the absence of output schema and moderate complexity, it is somewhat incomplete.

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?

With 78% schema coverage, the description adds minimal parameter-specific info beyond the schema, such as minimum points for certain platforms and auto-detection. The schema already handles most parameters with descriptions.

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 it creates a promotion task on Upvote.club, specifying the action and resource. It mentions key behaviors like spending points and auto-detecting platform, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like delete_task or list_platforms.

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 advises calling get_api_reference for examples and errors, providing some guidance, but lacks explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives or conditions for not using this tool. No exclusions for other tools.

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