Create Blogpost

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

The annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), so the description adds value by explaining that 'status' controls whether the post is published immediately or saved as a draft, and that 'body_representation' supports specific formats. However, it does not disclose the return value, possible side effects, or any authorization requirements, which would be useful for a create operation.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose followed by a clean argument list. Each line adds necessary clarification, but it does duplicate the parameter names already present in the schema, which is slightly redundant.

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?

All five parameters are thoroughly covered with additional context beyond the schema. However, the description omits any mention of the return value, error conditions, or prerequisites such as the existence of the space. For a create tool with no output schema, this leaves some uncertainty about expected outcomes.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter. It provides meaningful context for 'space_id', 'title', 'body_value', and crucially enumerates allowed values for 'body_representation' and 'status' that are absent from the schema. This is exemplary parameter documentation.

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 new blog post') and the resource ('in a space'), which is specific and distinct from other tools like create_page. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings such as create_page, so it loses a point for lacking that direct comparison.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_page or update_blogpost. It only lists parameters, leaving the usage context entirely implicit. This is a clear gap for a tool with many contextually similar siblings.

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