Create chirp

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the return value ('Returns the chirp id'), which matters because there is no output schema, but it says nothing about whether authentication is required, what happens on an empty chirp (0 required params), or how chirps are moderated/flagged as mature.

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?

Two short sentences, with the core action front-loaded and the return value appended. The parenthetical and example are brief enough to earn their place as disambiguation, though the billboard example is slightly decorative.

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 6-parameter creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin: it omits the media-upload prerequisite, the optionality of every parameter, content constraints, and the comment-threading behavior implied by parentPostId. Only the return value is covered.

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 only 50%: text, isActive, and isMature have no schema descriptions, and the tool description adds nothing about them. The description does not compensate for the gap, leaving half the parameters with no semantic guidance anywhere.

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+resource (post a chirp) and disambiguates the domain jargon ('social post' on BillboardBug) with a concrete example. It is clearly distinct from the deal-oriented siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast with update_chirp or get_chirp beyond the verb.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. that imageId/videoId must come from upload_media first), and no statement of when not to use it. The 'e.g. announcing a new billboard' hint is illustrative, not a usage rule.

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