Content calendar: queue posts for the best time, run what is due

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

The description transparently discloses that scheduling does not post immediately and that posts only go out when run_due is executed. It also notes that due posts go through the normal publish pipeline, providing insight into side effects. This goes beyond the annotations, which only state readOnlyHint false, by explaining the deferred execution model.

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 concise (about three sentences) yet packs essential information: the core behavior, the 'when' formats, the list of actions, and the condition for posting. It uses parentheses effectively to clarify sub-points without verbosity.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (multiple actions, a nested 'post' object), the description covers the main behavior and actions sufficiently. It does not detail edge cases or error handling, but within the provided context it is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's function and main usage.

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 only 40% (only 'post' and 'when' have descriptions). The tool description adds useful semantics for the 'when' parameter (ISO, relative formats, next_best) and clarifies the 'action' enum values, but parameters like 'include_done' and 'id' remain unexplained. The description partially compensates for the schema gaps but not fully.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: to queue posts for later publishing, with actions like add, list, cancel, run_due, and best_times. It explicitly mentions that nothing posts until run_due is called, distinguishing it from immediate publishing tools.

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 description implies when to use this tool by contrasting with immediate publishing ('Nothing posts until run_due is called') and by listing the available actions. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the behavioral distinction is clear enough for an agent to choose this for scheduling.

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