threads_publish_text

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'Publish' indicating a write operation but lacks details on side effects, authentication, rate limits, or response format. The agent is left uninformed about critical behavioral aspects.

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?

Single sentence with 18 words, front-loaded with action and key features. No wasted content; 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 tool with 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It omits return value, publishing flow (e.g., if container creation is needed), authentication, and prerequisites. Incomplete for safe autonomous invocation.

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 baseline is 3. The description summarizes optional features but adds no new meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It meets the minimum but does not enhance understanding.

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 clearly states 'Publish a text-only post on Threads', specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like threads_publish_carousel or threads_reply, though the name and 'text-only' imply the scope.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lists supported features but does not provide context for selection among many similar siblings (e.g., threads_publish_image, threads_reply).

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