Distribute a release

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint=true, and the description adds critical behavioral context: final action, weekly submission limit, structured error on limit exceeded, and idempotency deduplication for 24h. This goes beyond what annotations alone offer.

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?

Three sentences, each adding essential information: purpose, prerequisite and limit, and idempotency guidance. No fluff, front-loaded with the most important action.

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?

The description covers purpose, prerequisite, limits, error behavior, and idempotency. No output schema exists, but the description mentions error returns. It could briefly note the success response format, but is still fairly complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining idempotency_key's purpose and retry behavior, and reiterates that release_id is the identifier. This extra context justifies a 4.

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 it 'submits a release for distribution' and calls it the 'final, consequential action', distinguishing it from validate_release and other sibling tools. The verb 'distribute' and resource 'release' 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 explicitly says 'validate_release should pass first', providing a prerequisite. It also explains when to use idempotency_key (for retries) and mentions the weekly limit. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or list alternatives.

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