bookmark_tweet

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false) already flag this as a non-idempotent mutation. The description adds genuine context beyond them by disclosing that the call only *prepares a draft* and must be completed via approve_draft, i.e. the action is not immediate. It doesn't cover failure or duplicate-draft behavior, keeping it below 5.

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, front-loaded sentences with zero filler; the purpose leads and the approval constraint follows immediately. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present, return values needn't be described, and the approval requirement is stated. Still, for a mutation tool with 0% parameter coverage, the description omits what the draft/queue lifecycle does and what 'account' selects, leaving meaningful gaps.

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% for both required parameters, so the description must compensate. 'One exact post' loosely implies tweet_url takes a single post reference, but 'account' is never explained and no format or constraint guidance is added.

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 ('Prepare a bookmark draft') and narrows scope to 'one exact post', which lets an agent distinguish it from get_bookmarks and remove_bookmark. It stops short of naming a sibling, so it's clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

'Always requires approve_draft' conveys the mandatory follow-up step in the draft/approval workflow, which is real usage context. However, it gives no when-not guidance or explicit alternative routing for the sibling bookmark tools.

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