Reschedule post

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the bar is lower, but the description adds nothing: it doesn't say what happens if the post is already published, whether re-scheduling is allowed after failure, or what constraints exist on the new time.

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?

A single short sentence with the key concept front-loaded and no waste, but it is terse to the point of under-specification rather than genuinely economical.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, partial parameter coverage, and several sibling tools that also touch scheduling, the description says far too little about effects, failure cases, and required account/post state.

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?

Only 50% schema coverage, and the undocumented parameter postId is not explained in the description. The '(ISO 8601)' hint merely repeats the schema's own description of scheduledAt, adding no new meaning.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: moving a post's target time, with the ISO 8601 note. It does not distinguish itself from close siblings like schedule_post, update_post, or create_post, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 indication of when to use this versus schedule_post (which presumably sets an initial time) or update_post (which may also change scheduled fields). No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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