x_submit_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the post goes out publicly and immediately with no draft step, which is real value. It says nothing about authentication/session requirements (the sibling x_check_session implies a session is needed) or rate limits, leaving meaningful gaps 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the target format, followed by the critical public/immediate warning. No filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. For a mutation tool with zero annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description covers the public/immediate consequence but omits auth/session prerequisites and rate-limit context that an agent would need to invoke safely.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does clarify that 'target' accepts a URL or id, that 'text' is added content, and that 'account' selects the posting identity, but it doesn't explain the account value format or confirm text is required, leaving the bare schema partly unassisted.

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+resource ('Quote-post a tweet') with the target format (URL or id) and the identity used. The quote-post action is distinct from the sibling x_submit_post, x_submit_reply, and x_submit_repost operations, so an agent can route correctly.

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 only implied by the verb: quoting is the condition that selects this over the sibling post/reply/repost tools, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The 'PUBLICLY and IMMEDIATELY - no draft step' note hints at irreversibility but frames it as behavior, not selection guidance.

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