Publish a Hashnode draft

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the draft becomes a live post and lists return fields, but does not disclose side effects like the draft being consumed. This is adequate given the annotation 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?

The description is concise and well-structured: a one-sentence summary, an args section, a returns section, and an example. Every part serves a purpose with no redundant content.

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 tool with 2 parameters, annotations, and a return list, the description is complete. It covers the action, parameter sourcing, output format, and return value, along with a helpful example.

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 already describes both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds value by specifying that draft_id should be obtained from hashnode_create_draft or hashnode_list_drafts, which is helpful beyond the schema.

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 clearly states 'Publish an existing draft, making it a live blog post', specifying the action and result. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_draft or publish_post by focusing on the draft-to-post transition.

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 indicating that draft_id comes from hashnode_create_draft or hashnode_list_drafts, and shows a typical workflow. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the example clarifies the intended use case.

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