b24_feed_post

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only mentions the action and BB-code support. It does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, side effects, or error behavior. This is insufficient 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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose and feature. No extraneous 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?

Given the 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat complete for the basic action but lacks context on expected responses, error states, or how the tool integrates with other Bitrix24 operations. It could benefit from a note on return value or confirmation.

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 description coverage is high (83%). The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, reiterating BB-code support already described in the 'message' parameter. It does not explain the destination format or files encoding beyond what the schema provides.

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 action ('Publica un mensaje'), the target resource ('feed de actividad / Live Feed'), and a key feature ('soporte BB-code'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like b24_crm_create or b24_tasks_create, which target different resources.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool or provide alternatives. While the sibling tools cover other areas (CRM, tasks, etc.), the description lacks guidance on prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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