publish_mock

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states the access control change but does not disclose permissions required, reversibility (via unpublish_mock), rate limits, or side effects. Insufficient for a mutation tool.

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?

Single sentence that conveys the core action efficiently. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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 one parameter, the description covers the essential action. However, it lacks mention of return value or any post-publish behavior. Suitable for a simple publish tool but could be slightly more complete with permission notes.

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?

Single parameter 'mockId' is fully described in schema ('The mock server ID'). Description adds no extra meaning beyond that. Baseline 3 as schema coverage is 100%.

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?

Description clearly states verb (publish) and resource (mock server) with additional detail about setting access control to public. Distinguishes from sibling 'unpublish_mock' and 'update_mock'.

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?

Usage is implied (publish a mock to make it public) but no explicit guidance on when to use vs. alternatives or prerequisites. Siblings like 'update_mock' exist, but no criteria for choosing this tool.

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