Update post status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and repeatability profile is carried structurally. The description adds only that the post must already exist; it says nothing about permissions, validation failures, or what happens when an invalid transition is attempted.

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?

One short sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler, which is appropriate for a simple setter. The parenthetical example is the only questionable use of space given it uses the wrong enum label.

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 two-parameter mutation with rich annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: the agent knows what it changes and on what. It omits any mention of valid transitions, error behavior, or prerequisites, and the queue/schedule mismatch leaves a gap the schema alone must resolve.

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 100% with both parameters documented, including the enum, so the schema is authoritative and the baseline is 3. The description's 'queue' wording actually conflicts with the schema's 'schedule' value, so it adds no reliable meaning beyond the schema and slightly muddies it.

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?

States a specific verb (change status) and resource (an existing post), and the parenthetical clarifies it is a state transition rather than a content edit, which separates it from create_post/delete_post/get_post. However, the example term 'queue' does not match the actual enum values (draft/schedule), introducing a small ambiguity about what states exist.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance and names no alternatives, even though siblings like request_approval, pause_publishing, and get_publishing_state are plausible confusions. The agent must infer from the tool name alone that this is the setter for post status.

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