repost

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Requires authentication' and implies a write operation, but does not disclose details like rate limits, error conditions, or that it creates a new repost record. Adequate but not thorough.

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 three short sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the main purpose and efficiently covers modes and authentication. Every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential purpose, parameters, and auth. It could be improved by mentioning what the tool returns (e.g., the repost URI) or how it interacts with other tools like unrepost. Still, it is fairly complete for a simple action.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning by explaining that 'text' is for quote posts (max 300 chars) and that uri and cid are required for identifying the post. This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions, but could be more precise about uri and cid formats.

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 verb 'Repost' and the resource 'content on AT Protocol'. It distinguishes between simple repost and quote post, differentiating it from sibling tools like batch_repost and unrepost.

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 usage by mentioning simple repost vs quote post, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like batch_repost or create_post. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite guidance is provided.

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