update_post

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the ownership constraint but fails to explain consequences of failing ownership checks, side effects of status changes, or whether updates are reversible. This is minimal transparency 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 sentence that efficiently lists the updatable fields and includes an ownership caveat. Every word contributes meaning with no fluff.

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 five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far too sparse. It omits critical details like validation rules, state transition behaviors (e.g., posting side effects), error handling for unauthorized use, and expected outcomes, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It maps 'caption, schedule, timezone, or status' to parameters but does not clarify formats, optionality beyond the schema's enum, or the relationship between 'schedule' and 'scheduledFor'. It adds some value but is incomplete.

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 tool updates a post's caption, schedule, timezone, or status, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_post and delete_post by focusing on modifying an existing post's fields.

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 provides clear context by noting the tool only works on posts the user owns, implying a prerequisite for use. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusion scenarios, leaving some inference to the agent.

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