Finalize Blog Draft

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces this by stating it returns the final result and that subsequent save/deploy tools are needed, making it clear this tool does not persist changes. This adds contextual value beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line action statement, a brief note about next steps, and simple Args/Returns sections. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the key verb is front-loaded.

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 tool with one parameter, an output schema, and strong annotations, the description adequately covers the behavior and result. It identifies the completed-work requirement and the follow-up options, though it could be more explicit about prerequisites before finalizing.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for task_id with the description '확정할 작업 ID'. The Args section in the description repeats this exact information without adding any new meaning, so per the rubric the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Finalize blog draft' which clearly states the tool's function. It further explains it returns the final result of completed work, distinguishing it from sibling tools like blog_save and blog_deploy_github by noting those are subsequent steps.

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 clear context by stating that saving/deploying can be done later with blog_save or blog_deploy_github, implying this is the step before persistence. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives like blog_start_review or blog_apply_feedback, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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