publish_lesson

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

Discloses key behaviors: PII stripping, irreversibility, and return format. However, with no annotations provided, the description could also mention required permissions or rate limits.

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 focused paragraph, front-loaded with the main action. It is concise but could be slightly improved with better sentence separation for readability.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage guidelines, parameter context, return value, constraints (irreversibility), and alternatives.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds context like 'Topic key (used as public category)' and 'Framework/platform tag (nextjs, fastapi, go, docker, etc.)' but does not significantly enhance beyond schema.

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 'Publish a lesson to the Cachly Public Brain' and distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly naming alternatives for private lessons (learn_from_attempts, global_learn) and anonymized sharing (syndicate).

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use vs alternatives: 'Use learn_from_attempts or global_learn for private lessons; use syndicate for anonymized global sharing without framework tagging.' Also warns about irreversibility.

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