벨로그 글 발행

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true) already indicate mutation. The description adds that body is markdown and draft behavior, but does not disclose other side effects or prerequisites (e.g., authentication).

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 concise sentences, front-loading the core action. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, the description omits mention of the required 'title' parameter, which is fundamental. With 8 parameters, more overview would improve completeness.

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% (baseline 3). The description adds value by specifying that body is markdown and explaining the semantic consequence of draft=True, which goes beyond the schema description.

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 '새 글을 발행합니다' (publish a new post), with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like velog_update_post (update) and velog_delete_post (delete).

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?

Provides a clear context for using the draft mode ('draft=True 면 임시저장으로만 올라가고 공개되지 않으니, 확인이 필요할 때 사용하세요'). However, no explicit comparison to alternatives like velog_publish_markdown_file.

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