ghost_posts_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and discloses essentially nothing: no auth/permission requirements, no mention that title is required despite the schema marking zero required params, no side effects, and no clarification of the create-vs-publish relationship. Only the mutation nature is inferable from the verb.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and waste-free, which is structurally fine, but for a 23-parameter creation tool it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise.

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?

A 23-parameter write tool with no annotations and no output schema needs far more than four words. Nothing about required fields, defaults, publishing behavior, or the returned resource is conveyed, leaving the agent to reconstruct intent from the schema alone.

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 all 23 parameters are already documented in the schema (defaults, formats, enums). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clear verb+resource ('Create a new post'), which is unambiguous about what the tool does. It does not, however, differentiate this tool from siblings like ghost_posts_publish or ghost_posts_update, nor explain how creation interacts with the publish lifecycle.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, despite a dense sibling set (publish, unpublish, update, bulk_update). The agent gets no signal about whether creating with status='published' is preferred over create-then-publish.

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