post_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It adds a meaningful behavioral gate with 'Requires confirm=true' and clarifies that filePath switches the post to media. However, it does not disclose downstream effects such as visibility, irreversibility, or failure behavior.

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 a single compact sentence with the core action front-loaded and the mandatory confirm requirement at the end. There is no filler or redundant restating of schema details.

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 and no annotations, the description is not fully self-sufficient: it omits return behavior and side effects. Still, it states the required confirmation gate and the text/media branching, making it minimally viable for a simple create-status operation.

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 80%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that filePath turns the post into an image/video and by emphasizing that confirm must be true, which is not clear from the schema's bare boolean default.

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 states a concrete action ('Buat Status/story') and distinguishes text posts from image/video posts based on filePath. It is clear enough to separate this tool from the read/delete/status siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 main usage directive is 'Requires confirm=true', which tells the agent that the operation needs the confirmation flag. There is no explicit 'use this instead of X' or when-not-to-use guidance, so usage is mostly implied from the verb 'Buat' and the resource name.

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