Create Broadcast Channel Poll

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

The description mentions the return value (Poll/message ID) but does not disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, side effects, error conditions, or the fact that the channel must exist. Since annotations are minimal (no destructiveHint, etc.), the description could have provided more context.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for the purpose, a bullet-style list for parameters, and a return line. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information.

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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main action and inputs. However, it lacks details on error handling, prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing broadcast channel), and the exact format of the return value, leaving some gaps.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for each parameter. The description repeats this information in a condensed form but adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 (creates) and the resource (a poll in an Instagram broadcast channel). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools that create other types of content or objects.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it. The context is implied by the specific resource, but no direct guidance is provided.

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