Publish a page online

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (not read-only, open-world, non-destructive); the description adds what the annotations cannot — that output becomes publicly reachable at a shareable URL, what the resulting address looks like, plan quotas enforced, badge injection on Free, and the authentication requirement with a self-service path to obtain the key.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences with the core action and example URL front-loaded, followed by input modes and then constraints/auth. Dense but every clause carries information; the plan/badge sentence could arguably be trimmed but is load-bearing for expectations.

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 publishing mutation with no output schema, the description still discloses the return artifact (shareable link) and the shape of that link, plus quotas and auth. Minor gaps: behavior on republish to an existing path, and the 'title' parameter, are not addressed.

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 67% and the description fills key gaps: it explains html's origin ('from landing_page'), the file param's local-mode semantics, the nested 'page' object's purpose, and implies brand→subdomain and path→URL segment via the example link. Only 'title' remains unaddressed in both description and 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Put a sales page online and get a shareable link') and immediately clarifies the relationship with the sibling landing_page ('Pass the HTML from landing_page ... or "page" with landing_page arguments to build and publish in one step'). An agent can distinguish build-only from build-and-publish without opening schemas.

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?

Enumerates the three concrete invocation modes (raw html, local file path in local mode, nested 'page' object for one-step build+publish), states the plan-based differences (Free: 1 site/3 pages/badge; Pro: own domain, no badge), and names the prerequisite action (QUARTER4_API_KEY via cloud_account 'signup').

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