Publish a changelog entry

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-readonly, non-destructive, idempotent operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that an already-live entry retains its original publish date, which clarifies the tool's idempotent behavior and helps an agent predict outcomes for different entry states.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a meaningful edge-case behavior. Every word earns its place.

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 simple two-parameter mutation with useful annotations, the description covers the key behavior: immediate publishing and the live-entry edge case. It does not describe the response format or error conditions, but the absence of an output schema and the low complexity make this acceptable.

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?

The schema documents project_id but not entry_id, so description-level parameter coverage is partial. The description implies that entry_id identifies the entry to publish, but it does not add explicit detail about the id format, constraints, or how the two parameters interact beyond that.

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 ('Publish'), a specific resource ('a draft or scheduled entry'), and the timing ('right now'). It clearly distinguishes publish_entry from siblings like create_entry, update_entry, and get_entry because the operation is explicit and the target state is named.

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 context for when to use the tool: to publish a draft or scheduled entry immediately. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the distinction from create/update/get/list is strongly implied by the verb and target states.

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