Schedule post

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that this creates a scheduled post, but it does not mention validation, whether the time must be in the future, side effects, execution details, or what the response contains.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with a useful example and no filler. It is concise and readable, though the terseness leaves behavioral and contextual details unaddressed.

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 write tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this sparse description is not complete enough for an agent to invoke it confidently. It omits return value, scheduling constraints, and how related parameters like threadParts and accountOverrides interact.

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 explains caption, mediaIds, postType, accountIds, scheduledAt, threadParts, firstComment, and accountOverrides. The description only adds a concrete example format for scheduledAt, which is a minor enrichment over the schema's existing ISO 8601 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 identifies the action ('Create') and the object ('a post'), and adds the scheduling qualifier with an ISO 8601 time example. It does not explicitly contrast schedule_post with siblings like create_post or reschedule_post, but the scheduling qualifier makes the core purpose unambiguous.

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 phrase 'scheduled for an ISO 8601 time' implies this tool is for future-dated posts, which provides some usage context. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives such as create_post for immediate publishing or reschedule_post for changing an existing schedule.

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