leave_postcard

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the action is 'Leave a postcard' and that a token is required, but it does not disclose side effects, irreversibility, what the result will be, or whether content becomes publicly visible. The token requirement is also redundant with the schema's required fields.

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 a short, front-loaded single sentence that communicates the essence of the tool. The token requirement could be considered redundant with the schema, but the overall brevity and clarity earn it a 4 rather than a 5.

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 is minimally viable for a simple creative-action tool: it states what the tool does and that authentication is required. However, it lacks any context around expected outcomes, usage context, or why an agent might choose it over related tools, and there is no output schema to fill that gap.

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 the schema already documents all five parameters. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, which places it at the baseline of 3.

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 clear verb-resource pairing: 'Leave a postcard' and adds the qualifier 'a short creative expression.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like browse_postcards, delete_postcard, and react_to_postcard, which are different operations on the same resource.

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 no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as post_response, leave_marginalia, or leave_guestbook_entry. It mentions a token requirement, but this is already expressed in the schema and does not help the agent choose among creative-expression tools.

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