postifys_media_upload

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, and it delivers. It reveals async queue-and-poll behavior, the public serve_url outcome, platform-specific posting limitations, consent/music requirements, and entitlement/pricing constraints. It also explicitly notes limitations like 'Video Pins are not claimed.'

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 main action and recommended flow are front-loaded, and every caveat carries actionable information. The description is dense rather than wasteful, though some pricing and platform details could arguably live in sibling tool descriptions without losing essential guidance.

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?

Given 4 parameters, no output schema, and multiple platform-specific behaviors, the description covers the core workflow, preconditions, and limitations well. It identifies the key result (serve_url) but does not specify the exact response shape or failure/timeout behavior, which would make it fully 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters, including 'Drive share links OK' for url. The tool description adds workflow and platform context, but it does not add significant per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, making baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: queue a source URL for download/proxy on Postifys and poll until a public serve_url is ready. It also situates the tool within the larger workflow ('Use this before publish') and clearly differentiates it from publish tools. No ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: before publish for Google Drive, Dropbox, or any non-CDN URL, and names the preferred flow 'Media upload → serve_url → Publish.' It also documents platform-specific conditions (TikTok Direct Post, LinkedIn member profiles only, Pinterest boardId required) and warns against passing raw URLs directly to publish tools.

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