Publish post

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent, and the description goes further by disclosing the irreversible consequence ('A sent email cannot be recalled') and the abort conditions of the server-side check. The section routing fallback chain adds operational context not available in the annotations.

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 imperative one-liner is front-loaded and the remaining sentences are dense with distinct facts. The slight restatement between 'Publish a draft now' and 'Publishes a draft immediately' is the only waste.

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 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, the definition covers failure modes, email irreversibility, and section routing. It stops short of describing what is returned (post URL, publish status) or what state the draft is left in afterward.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning: it explains that send_email=false suppresses email while still publishing on the web, and it spells out the three-step resolution order for section_id. Only the post_id sourcing is left entirely to the 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 definition opens with a specific verb-and-resource pair plus a timing qualifier ('Publish a draft now') that separates it from schedule_post and update_draft. The second sentence confirms the effect without restating the title verbatim.

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?

It establishes clear operating conditions: the pre-publish check runs first and fails on missing title or empty body, and the audience comes from the draft. It does not explicitly name the alternatives (schedule_post, unpublish_post) that an agent might confuse it with, so exclusions are inferred rather than stated.

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