hex-publish-guide-drafts

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden, and it discloses almost nothing behavioral. 'Publish' is a mutation, yet there is no statement about reversibility, whether the operation is idempotent, permission requirements, or side effects on the draft set. The only useful signal is the batch scope implied by 'all'.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, but the brevity comes at the cost of the behavioral detail an agent needs for a mutation tool.

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 parameterless, annotation-free mutation with no output schema, the description should say what happens on publish and what the agent gets back or should do next. None of that is present, leaving a meaningful disclosure gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to document and there is no parameter ambiguity to resolve. Baseline 4 applies for a no-argument tool.

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 and resource (publish drafted guides) and scopes it to all currently drafted guides. It is distinguishable from hex-list-draft-guides and hex-delete-guide-draft, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to publish versus when to keep drafting, no prerequisites (e.g., review approval), and no mention of related tools like hex-upsert-guide-draft. The agent must infer everything about timing.

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