qzone_publish

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does convey that publication is immediate and non-confirmatory, but it does not mention side effects, irreversibility, authentication requirements, or failure behavior. This is useful but partial coverage.

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 sentences carry the essential action, image parameter semantics, and alternative tool guidance. No filler or redundancy is present.

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 simple two-parameter mutation tool, the description covers direct usage, image path details, and the key alternative. The lack of return-value or error details is a minor gap given there is no output schema, but the core call is sufficiently specified.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by clarifying that images accepts multiple local absolute paths, which is meaningful beyond the schema's array-of-strings type. The required content parameter is not elaborated, but its purpose is already clear from its name and the tool's action.

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 clear action and resource: '直接发布 QQ 空间说说' (directly publish a Qzone status), which is specific and not a tautology. It also implicitly differentiates from the sibling qzone_prepare_publish by emphasizing it is the direct publish path.

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 explicitly says to use qzone_prepare_publish instead if confirmation before publishing is needed, and the word '直接' signals this tool is for immediate publication. This gives an agent a clear when-to-use versus alternative decision.

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