Publish Draft Checked

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that confirmation is required and prepublish checks are run, but it does not explain side effects, irreversibility, permissions, or what happens if checks fail.

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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted language. It is appropriately concise, though its brevity leaves important selection and safety details to other fields.

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?

The tool has a rich schema with full parameter coverage and an output schema, so return values need not be described. However, for a publishing mutation with no annotations, the description should do more to clarify how it differs from sibling publish/prepublish tools and what the checks imply.

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 all four parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the existing schema text, making 3 the appropriate baseline.

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 states a specific action and resource: publishing a draft through a safer path with confirmation and prepublish checks. It partially distinguishes itself from siblings like publish_draft and prepublish_draft by calling out the safer/checked workflow, though it does not explicitly compare them.

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 phrase 'A safer publishing path' implies when to choose this over a normal publish operation, but the description never names alternatives or states when not to use it. Usage is inferable rather than explicit.

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