dismiss_suggestion

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds real context beyond them: a draft is not scheduled and nothing is published, and already-converted suggestions are protected from dismissal or overwrite. It still says nothing about the effect on the originating suggestion record or whether a dismissal can be undone.

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?

Front-loaded with the primary action and its alternative, then the safety requirement. The final sentence ('Never dismisses, and does not overwrite, a suggestion that was already turned into a post') is slightly convoluted and could be tighter, but every sentence carries information.

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 two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers both modes, the confirmation requirement, and the protected-record case. Only the result of a successful call (what the agent sees back) is left implicit.

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 coverage is 100%, so the 3 baseline applies, and the description does earn more by explaining the consequence of save_as_draft (unpublished, not scheduled, nothing published) rather than just restating that it saves a draft. suggestion_id is left to the schema, which already points to list_post_suggestions.

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?

States a specific verb (dismiss) and resource (a proactive post suggestion) plus a second explicit mode (save_as_draft converts it to an unpublished draft). The dual behavior is unambiguous and clearly distinct from the listing sibling referenced via suggestion_id.

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?

Gives a clear when-to-use condition for both modes and a hard prerequisite ('WRITE: confirm the exact suggestion with the user first'), plus an exclusion for suggestions already converted to a post. It does not name an alternative tool for handling suggestions (e.g. list_post_suggestions), so it falls short of a 5.

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