delimit_social_approve

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses side effects: action='approve' posts via social backend (network write), action='reject' discards, action='list' is read-only. This is sufficient for understanding behavioral traits, though it could mention rate limits or auth.

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?

Description is concise with no redundant sentences. It is front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidance, then side effects. Every sentence adds value.

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 the tool's complexity (three actions), the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, sibling contrast, and side effects comprehensively. An output schema exists for return values, so no need to describe those. It is complete for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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%, but description adds behavioral context for each action value and explains when draft_id is required. For example, it notes that 'approve' actually posts, which is not in the schema. This enhances understanding beyond the schema's simple description.

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 'Manage social media drafts — list, approve, reject (Pro).' It uses a specific verb (manage) and resource (social drafts), and enumerates the three actions. It distinguishes from siblings like delimit_social_post and delimit_social_history.

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 when to use: 'to clear the social drafts queue created by delimit_social_post(draft=True).' When NOT to use: 'to draft (use delimit_social_post(draft=True)) or inspect history (delimit_social_history).' Includes sibling contrast, leaving no ambiguity.

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