article_create

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 does disclose the language tone behavior (ko=뉴닉 style, en=Milk Road style), which is useful context, and specifies the Web3 domain. However, it does not mention side effects, return values, or default status, though some of that is covered in the schema.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that communicates the core purpose and a key customization option efficiently. It has no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 7 parameters, 3 required, and no output schema, the description is somewhat thin. It covers the main purpose and language feature but lacks information about return values, typical workflow, or how it differs from other article tools. The schema fills parameter gaps but does not provide operational context.

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 100%, with all parameters already having clear descriptions. The description adds no new parameter-specific information beyond what is in the schema; the language tone is already described in the schema's language parameter. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 '새 Web3 아티클 생성' (create a new Web3 article) with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like article_update or article_list by focusing solely on creation. The language tone switch adds a distinct feature.

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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like article_update or article_search. Usage is implied: use for creating new articles. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tool calls are mentioned.

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