postifys_cq_add_item

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully notes that path may be a Drive share URL resolved at publish time and mentions required entitlements, but it does not explain what happens on failure, whether the action is immediate, or what the response contains.

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 concise at roughly three sentences and avoids fluff. The key purpose appears after prerequisite context rather than being front-loaded, but every sentence contributes useful information.

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 7-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description is incomplete. It covers prerequisites and path behavior, but omits explanation of most parameters, return values, and operational context such as how tableId relates to the content queue.

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 only 14%, so the description must add meaning for the many undocumented parameters. It adds value for path ('may be a Drive share URL') and implies status is pending, but it does not explain tableId, title, hashtags, postType, or description, leaving major semantic gaps.

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 states a specific action, 'Add a pending row' to the Postifys Content Queue, which clearly conveys the core purpose. It distinguishes the native queue from n8n with 'scheduler without n8n', but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool postifys_cq_import_rows, which also adds rows.

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 clear prerequisites ('Requires CONTENT_QUEUE_ENABLED on the server and publish entitlement') which imply when the tool is usable. It does not, however, provide explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like postifys_cq_import_rows or postifys_publish.

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