Publish a page online

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the auth prerequisite (browser approval via cloud_account), plan quotas (free: 1 site, 3 live pages, badge; Pro: own domain, no badge), and that a shareable URL is returned. The main gap is what happens when publishing to a path that already exists — overwrite vs. error is unstated, which matters for a mutation flagged destructiveHint=false.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and result, then the input modes, then plan limits and the auth prerequisite — a sensible order with no filler sentences. It is dense to the point of being crammed, and the plan-tier detail could be trimmed if space were a concern, but it does affect tool selection.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly states the return value (a shareable link, with format example) and covers the auth flow and quota constraints for a 6-parameter, nested-object tool. Missing pieces are the 'title' parameter and republish/overwrite semantics at an existing path.

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 compensates by explaining that 'html', 'file', and 'page' are three mutually exclusive input modes, which the schema does not convey on its own. It does not explain 'title' (undocumented in the schema too) or clarify that 'brand' composes the subdomain beyond what the schema already states.

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') plus the concrete result ('get a shareable link') with an example URL. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from the landing_page sibling by treating its HTML output as an input here.

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 enumerates the three ways to invoke it (raw HTML from landing_page, a local file path in local mode, or a 'page' object to build and publish in one call). It also names the prerequisite alternative tool: call cloud_account with action "connect" first if not connected, and flags it as free.

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