Describe platform

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It effectively discloses that the tool is local and side-effect-free by stating 'Offline — no API call.' This is meaningful additional context beyond the schema, even if it does not detail return formatting or latency.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed immediately by the most important usage guidance and a note about being offline. Every sentence 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 one-optional-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, its intended position in a workflow, and its offline/safe nature. It does not describe the exact shape of the returned schemas, but it names what the output contains ('publish field schemas and adapter capabilities'), which is likely enough for an agent to call it correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the platform parameter, including the list of valid keys and the behavior when omitted. The description adds only the general context of per-platform behavior, which is useful but does not substantially extend the schema's parameter documentation.

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 verb and resource: it returns 'per-platform publish field schemas and adapter capabilities.' It also clarifies how this tool relates to content-publishing actions by explicitly mentioning create_post/create_comment, making it easy to distinguish from the many post/comment tools in the sibling list.

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 an explicit usage trigger: 'Call before create_post/create_comment to learn required fields.' It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but it provides clear context for when this tool should be invoked, which is sufficient given there are no similar discovery tools among siblings.

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