mdl_feeds_create

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the auth requirement and the explicit-request restriction. The 'privacy defaults to public' claim merely repeats the schema default, and nothing is said about reversibility or side effects such as notifications.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then the auth prerequisite, then the usage restriction. 'Feeds: create.' is mildly redundant with the tool name but the remaining content is dense and earns its place.

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 an 8-parameter write tool with no output schema and zero schema description coverage, the description leaves most of the input surface undocumented. It covers purpose, auth and mutation caution well, but an agent still cannot know what tag_id, group_id, tag_type, spoiler or attachments do.

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?

Eight parameters at 0% schema description coverage, and the description addresses only the privacy default, which is already visible in the schema. Required 'message', plus tag_id, spoiler, embed_id, group_id, tag_type and attachments are left completely unexplained by both schema and 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Feeds: create. Publishes an activity post'), which an agent can distinguish from the read siblings mdl_feeds_fetch/mdl_feeds_get and from mdl_feeds_edit/delete. It does not explicitly name those alternatives, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

Gives an explicit use condition ('use only for an explicit user request') and a prerequisite (host-configured MyDramaList authentication). It does not name an alternative tool for adjacent needs, but the when-to-use gate is clear.

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