collections_items_publish_items

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core action but omits important details such as permission requirements, reversibility, idempotency, or response format. The phrase 'make them live' conveys the transition but little else.

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 sentence that communicates the action and result without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the verb.

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 two-parameter mutation tool, the description covers the basic action, but it lacks usage guidance and behavioral context. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, the description could do more to explain expected outcomes, prerequisites, and edge cases. However, the schema fills in parameter details, so the description is minimally 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?

The input schema already provides complete descriptions for both parameters (collection_id and itemIds), covering 100% of the parameters. The description adds no extra parameter-level syntax or constraints beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 the specific verb 'Publish' and clearly identifies both the resource ('draft items in a CMS collection') and the outcome ('make them live'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_item_live or update_items_live, which operate on live items directly.

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 choose this tool over alternatives such as collections_items_create_item_live or sites_publish. It lacks any prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tool names.

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