uselink_publish_document

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the core behavior (snapshotting the draft into the published version), the effect (public URL access), and the return value (document with public URL). However, it does not mention whether this overwrites an existing published version, any permissions required, or potential side effects, leaving some behavioral traits undisclosed.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the verb 'Publish', and each sentence adds meaningful information: the action/effect and the return value. There is no redundant or unnecessary wording.

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 tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers the action, mechanism, and return value. It does not explain error conditions or prerequisites, but these are not critical for a straightforward publish operation in context.

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 describes the only parameter (id) as 'Document UUID' with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides, though it implies the id is the document to publish.

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 uses a specific verb ('Publish') and resource ('uselink document'), and further explains the mechanism ('Snapshots the current draft into the published version') and the result ('makes it accessible via the public URL'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like unpublish_document and publish_with_assets.

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 implies the tool is used to publish a document when a draft is ready, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as uselink_publish_with_assets or uselink_unpublish_document. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so the usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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