apiosk_publish_api

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-read-only, non-idempotent operation, and the description adds useful behavioral context: publishing is performed via the active local wallet or APIOSK_PRIVATE_KEY and requires no dashboard. This exposes an important auth/execution path beyond the annotations. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 no filler. Every phrase adds value: the action, the resource, the platform, the auth mechanism, and the no-dashboard context.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description is too sparse for a 9-parameter publish operation with an 11% schema description coverage. It omits guidance on how required fields should be chosen, what listing_group options imply, how listing_metadata is used, and what prerequisites besides the wallet/private key may exist.

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 only 11%, so the description needs to compensate for 9 under-documented parameters. It adds some meaning around wallet/private-key authentication, but it does not explain the core required fields such as name, slug, endpoint_url, price_usd, description, or the optional listing_group and listing_metadata semantics.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Publish a new API on Apiosk.' It clearly indicates the action is creating/publishing, not updating or deleting, and the platform is named. The phrase 'new API' also distinguishes this from update/delete siblings and from publish_project or publish_x402_route.

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 clear context about when to use this tool: when the user wants to publish an API without using a dashboard, using the active local wallet or APIOSK_PRIVATE_KEY. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives such as apiosk_update_api or publish_x402_route.

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