share_post

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not explain side effects (e.g., whether sharing creates a visible repost on the user's feed), required permissions, or response behavior. The minimal description leaves significant behavioral unknowns.

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?

A single short sentence that conveys the core purpose efficiently. No filler or redundant information. However, the sentence could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not cover return values, error conditions, or behavior details. A more complete description would mention what happens after sharing (e.g., returns share URL or status).

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% with both parameters described. The description adds 'optional commentary' which mirrors the schema's 'Optional commentary to add when sharing'. No additional meaning beyond the schema; baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 description clearly states the action ('Share') and resource ('LinkedIn post'), with optional commentary. It distinguishes from siblings like 'comment_on_post' and 'like_post', though the exact semantics of 'share' (e.g., reposting vs. sharing via LinkedIn's feature) could be slightly ambiguous.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'comment_on_post' or 'create_post'. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or when sharing is not appropriate, leaving the agent without decision support.

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