Reschedule a post

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

Annotations already establish this is a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation, and the description adds genuinely new context: the required user confirmation and the fact that only certain post states can be moved. It still doesn't say what happens to the original scheduled entry or what the pending-confirmation response looks like, keeping it below a 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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and its scope, and the confirmation prerequisite stated up front. No filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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 three-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description plus schema cover eligibility, the time window, and the two-phase confirmation flow. The main residual gap is where job_id comes from and what a failed or pending reschedule returns.

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 coverage is 67% and the schema itself documents the publish_at window and the confirmation_token lifecycle well, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, and job_id is left unexplained in both description and schema (presumably obtained from list_scheduled).

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 concrete verb and resource ('Move a ... post to a new time') and narrows the eligible states to scheduled, waiting, or missed, which distinguishes it from cancel_scheduled and resume_publish without naming them. It is clear but stops short of explicitly routing to a sibling.

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 eligibility condition (only scheduled, waiting, or missed posts) is useful implied guidance on when the tool applies, and 'Needs the user's confirmation' signals a prerequisite step. However, it never names alternatives such as cancel_scheduled for posts that should not be moved, and doesn't say what to do for already-published posts.

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