douyin_publish_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the critical behavior: a confirm-less call is a dry run that publishes nothing and returns a plan. However it omits auth/account prerequisites, failure behavior, and what happens to a scheduled post after acceptance.

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?

Purpose and the confirmation constraint are front-loaded, and every sentence carries an instruction. It is slightly verbose and repetitive with the bolded warning markers, which costs a point but not comprehension.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description explains what the first call returns and how to proceed, which is the key gap to fill for a two-phase publisher. Missing pieces such as account/login prerequisites and error handling keep it short of 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 description coverage is already 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the field-level text by explaining the call-to-call relationship between plan_id and confirm, which the schema states only in isolation.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource: 发布一条抖音图文（多图 + 标题 + 正文）. The 图文 qualifier cleanly separates it from the sibling douyin_publish_video, so an agent can pick the right publisher without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly states the workflow: first call without confirm publishes nothing and returns a plan; read the plan to the user, obtain explicit consent, then call again with the same plan_id plus confirm=true. It also states an exclusion — do not pass confirm=true directly or decide on the user's behalf.

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