answer_question

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers: it discloses that the answer is public and irreversible ('CANNOT be edited or deleted afterwards') and instructs confirmation of exact text. It also describes the return payload, so the agent knows what to expect in the response.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and its irreversible nature before the sourcing hint and return description. No filler, though the return-value sentence could be trimmed given it is not strictly needed for invocation.

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 a two-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the side effects (public, permanent), the prerequisite (question_id source) and the response shape. Nothing an agent needs to call this safely is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters including the irreversibility of 'text'. The description reinforces their meaning but adds no format or syntax detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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?

States a precise verb+resource+audience ('Post a public answer to a buyer's pre-sale question'), which cleanly distinguishes it from the read-only sibling get_questions. An agent immediately knows this is a write operation on a listing question.

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 tells the agent where the required question_id comes from ('Get the question_id from get_questions, typically with status=UNANSWERED'), routing it to the correct sibling and condition. It also prescribes a confirmation step before sending, which is actionable guidance.

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