linkedin_publish_post

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 does reveal the important confirmation guardrail, but it does not mention authentication requirements, public visibility, irreversibility, or potential side effects of publishing a post to LinkedIn.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the action and then adds the critical guardrail. No filler or redundant information is present.

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 simple two-parameter publishing tool, the description covers the core action and the key safety requirement. It omits details like authentication or return behavior, but those are less critical given the simplicity of the operation and the clear sibling separation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning to the parameters. It effectively does: 'text post' implies the text parameter's purpose, and the confirmation rule explains the confirmed parameter's role as an explicit user-approval gate.

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 starts with the specific verb 'Publish' and the object 'a text post', making the tool's function immediately clear. It is naturally distinguishable from the sibling tools, which handle authentication status, comment listing, and comment replies.

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 provides a clear usage condition: set confirmed=true only after explicit user approval. While it does not explicitly discuss when to choose this tool over siblings, the sibling operations are so different in purpose that the intended use is evident.

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