Postings: unconfirm free posting

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint=false and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context: 'Reverts a prior state change,' 'Reversible,' and the condition about 'not fixed.' It explains the idempotency implication (reversibility) but does not detail side effects or permissions. Adds value beyond 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 front-loaded with key information (write, reverts state) and ends with endpoint. Some redundancy with the emoji and bold formatting, but overall not verbose. Every sentence contributes meaning.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain the return value or error cases. For a simple write operation, the action is clear, but the lack of output description leaves a gap. Adequate but not 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented. The description implies the use of posting_id_by_customer ('specified free posting') but does not add new semantic information. Baseline 3 for high coverage.

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's action: 'Remove a specified free posting by unconfirming it.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like postings_unconfirm_receipt and postings_unconfirm_transaction by specifying 'free posting'. The verb+resource combination is specific and 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 description provides a condition: 'This will only work if the posting is not fixed.' It implies usage for free postings but does not explicitly contrast with siblings. No when-not guidance, but the context of 'free posting' and sibling names makes it clear enough.

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