Save / refresh creator profile

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

Adds substantial value beyond the annotations: it discloses that the write overwrites prior analysis, that metrics are re-fetched on confirm, and critically that the first call writes nothing and only returns a preview + token. This makes the destructiveHint/idempotentHint profile actionable rather than abstract.

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-loads what it does, then the overwrite consequence, then the two-step mechanics. Four dense sentences with no filler; the preview/confirm warning is placed where the agent needs it.

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?

Even without an output schema, the description describes what the first call returns (a preview and confirm_token), which is the key behavioral contract for a two-step mutation. Nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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 80% schema coverage the schema already documents most params, but the description adds real meaning for confirm_token (omit to preview, pass identical args to apply) and the manual-vs-X selection. max_posts and payout_handle remain unexplained in text, keeping it from a 5.

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 specific verbs (analyses, saves/refreshes) and the exact resource (creator profile in the marketplace), and distinguishes the X API path from the `manual` path. An agent can differentiate it from siblings like analyze_creator or get_creator purely from the text.

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?

Gives clear when-to-use context via the explicit TWO-STEP flow and the 'show preview, then confirm' instruction, plus the X-vs-manual branch. It stops short of naming alternatives (e.g., analyze_creator for analysis-only), so it is clear context without explicit exclusions.

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