Post Blackboard

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) and the description adds 'ephemeral', which implies TTL behavior. However, it does not disclose what happens when a message expires, whether it overwrites existing content, or any failure modes. With annotations present, this adds moderate value but not rich context.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose. No filler or redundant information.

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?

The tool is simple, the schema is fully described, annotations are present, and there is no output schema. The description adequately covers the core behavior for a posting tool, though it could have briefly mentioned the absence of a return value or confirmation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are already well-documented. The description's mention of 'message or state update' aligns with the content parameter but adds no additional semantics beyond the 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?

The description states a specific action ('post') with a clear resource ('blackboard'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'read_blackboard'. The qualifiers 'ephemeral message or state update' provide additional scope nuance.

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?

Usage context is clear from the description itself: posting ephemeral messages or state updates to the blackboard. The presence of read_blackboard among siblings implies the complementary read use case, but no explicit exclusions or alternative references are given.

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