Repost

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false), the description adds a critical behavioral requirement: confirm must be true and set only after explicit user confirmation. It also indicates the operation is a POST, reinforcing its mutating nature. This adds value beyond the schema, without contradiction.

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 conveys the endpoint and the crucial confirm requirement. It is front-loaded and free of filler, making it easy for an agent 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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential action and the confirm requirement. It omits details like response format, side effects (e.g., public visibility), or prerequisites beyond confirmation, but these are not critical for invocation given the annotations.

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 schema covers confirm (50%) but not post_id. The description refers to 'the post to repost', which gives context to post_id as the target post. It does not elaborate on format or other details, but it partially compensates for the schema's missing description.

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 the action via the HTTP endpoint 'POST /2/users/:id/retweets' and the tool title 'Repost'. This clearly identifies a repost operation, and the sibling 'x_organic_unrepost' provides contrast, making it unambiguous which tool to use for creating a repost.

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 notes that confirm=true is required after the user names the post, which is a condition for use. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like unrepost or explain when not to use this tool. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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