Reshare post to company page

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating operation (readOnlyHint=false) and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as permission requirements, side effects, or reversibility, relying entirely on the schema for parameter meanings.

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 sentence with a clear verb and object, front-loaded with the core action. It contains no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 simple mutation tool with 100% schema coverage, an output schema, and annotations covering mutation, the description is adequate. It lacks explicit alternatives and side-effect disclosure, but the structured data fills most gaps, making it nearly 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 schema fully documents all three parameters, including company_id's validation purpose and thoughts_text being optional. The description's mention of 'commentary' aligns with the schema but adds no new information beyond what is already provided.

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 action (reshare), the target (company page), and the optional commentary. It distinguishes from sibling tools like personal_reshare_company_post by specifying the company page as the destination, and from company_create_post by focusing on resharing an existing post.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: to reshare another post on the company page with optional commentary. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the action is specific enough to differentiate from creating posts or sharing to personal pages.

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