publish_thread

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core action and media types but does not mention required permissions, side effects (creating a public post), rate limits, or what happens on failure. This is a thin profile for a write operation.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the verb, platform, and content options with no wasted words. It is easily scannable by an agent.

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 tool is simple with two parameters and has an output schema, so return values are already covered. However, for a mutation tool it lacks context on prerequisites, permission requirements, and how it differs from the many other publish tools, which an agent would need to call it confidently.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It partially does so by indicating the content combinations: text alone or image+text, which maps to the text and image_url parameters. It does not explain URL formats or constraints, but it does clarify that image is optional.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Publie une publication sur Threads' (publishes a publication on Threads), and specifies the supported content shapes (text, or image + text). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling publish tools aimed at Facebook Pages or Instagram.

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 implies usage by naming the target platform 'Threads', which tells an agent when to choose it over Instagram/Facebook publish tools. However, it gives no explicit alternatives, exclusions, or conditions, leaving the routing partially to inference.

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