publish_status

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the tool calls an API to post text, requires a confirm parameter for a two-step process, and returns a dictionary with status info and review reminders. However, it does not mention potential irreversible effects, authentication needs, or rate limits.

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 structured with Args and Returns sections, but it includes some redundancy (e.g., restating '发布饭否内容' in the first line and again in the API reference). It could be more concise by combining these, but it is not overly long.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema and only two parameters, the description provides enough detail: what it does, parameters with constraints, and return value structure. It lacks sibling differentiation but covers the essentials for a simple text-posting tool.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains 'status' has a 140-character limit and 'confirm' is a secondary confirmation parameter. The return structure is detailed with keys like publish ID, timestamp, result, and tips. This adds meaningful context beyond the raw 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 the tool publishes text-only content on Fanfou via a specific API endpoint. It explicitly says '(仅文字)' distinguishing it from sibling tools like publish_photo. The verb '发布' (publish) and resource '饭否内容' (Fanfou content) are specific.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like publish_photo or get_home_timeline. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate or not.

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