List scheduled company posts (optional cancel)

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

The description goes beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation by explaining the underlying UI mechanics: no dedicated URL, no exposed URN, stable 0-based indices, and display datetime parsed from aria-label. It also discloses that cancellation uses the 'Delete post' action. This provides valuable behavioral context for operating correctly.

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 succinct sentences: a clear purpose statement followed by a focused paragraph on necessary technical context. There is no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool interacts with a non-standard dialog UI, and the description provides essential details about lack of URNs and index-based row handling. The output schema presumably covers the returned list. It could mention admin-level prerequisites, but the phrase 'admin page-posts screen' implies this. Overall, it is sufficiently complete.

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?

The input schema already provides detailed descriptions for both parameters, with cancel_index explaining its 0-based index, cancellation behavior, and read-only omit. The description text does not add additional parameter-specific meaning, but the 100% schema coverage means it does not need to.

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 the tool lists posts queued for future publication and optionally cancels one. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like company_list_posts (which lists posts generally) and company_delete_post (which would require a URN that this tool notes is not exposed).

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 implies usage for managing the scheduled queue by explaining the dialog-based UI and row identification, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it. The technical context (no URN, index-based) hints at why this tool is needed, but lacks direct 'use this instead of X' guidance.

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