Pin post

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real context: admin-only authorization, the 3/12 capacity ceilings, and the one-call undo path. The 'sends nothing to anyone' and no-confirmation note is useful beyond what the annotations convey, though capacity-exceeded behavior is still unstated.

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 second paragraph is largely a restatement of the first sentence, repeating the 3/12 limits and 'Admins only' verbatim. The key facts are front-loaded, but redundancy costs it points.

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 mutation tool with a full schema and annotations but no output schema, the description covers authorization, capacity, undo, and unpin semantics. Only failure behavior at the pin cap is missing, which is a minor 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in structured fields including pinned=false and course_page_id. The description reinforces the unpin flag and the feed-vs-classroom-page choice but adds no syntax or edge-case detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource and adds scope: pinning to the feed (max 3) versus a Classroom page (max 12). The agent can distinguish this from pin_comment and update_post without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly states the two destinations, that pinned=false unpins, and that admins only may call it, which is clear usage context. It stops short of naming sibling alternatives (e.g. pin_comment for comments, update_post for edits), leaving that routing to inference.

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