opentweet_create_tweet

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

Annotations already indicate destructive (creation) and non-idempotent behavior, which the description matches. It adds the three posting modes but does not disclose additional traits like irreversibility or editing possibilities.

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, which is concise but lacks important details. It earns its place but is too minimal for the tool's complexity.

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?

Given 8 parameters and many sibling tools, the description is sparse. It does not explain parameter interplay, error conditions, or return values. No output schema is present, so the description should provide more context.

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% with individual parameter descriptions. The tool description provides a high-level summary of modes but adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('Create a tweet') and the three modes (draft, schedule, publish immediately). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like opentweet_publish_tweet or opentweet_schedule_tweet, which could overlap.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings such as opentweet_publish_tweet or opentweet_schedule_tweet. The description omits explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use instructions.

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