Pins one selected Mastodon status only after explicit confirm=true, ensuring deliberate confirmation before the action.
Pin one selected Mastodon status after explicit confirm=true.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| confirm | Yes | Explicitly confirm pinning this one Mastodon status | |
| status_id | Yes | ||
| account_id | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the confirmation gate, but that merely restates the schema's const-true confirm field; it says nothing about whether pinning is idempotent, how to unpin, required permissions, or rate limits.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; every clause earns its place.
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?
For an unannotated mutation tool with no output schema and an undocumented account_id, the description should cover permissions, reversibility/unpin path, and multi-account targeting. It covers none of these.
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 only 33%: the description covers only the confirm gate (already documented in the schema) and hints at a single status_id. The account_id parameter — important when multiple Mastodon accounts exist — is entirely unaddressed in both schema and description.
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 a specific verb+resource ('Pin one selected Mastodon status') with a clear scope of one status. It is distinguishable from the sibling ads_mastodon_status, but never names or contrasts an alternative sibling tool.
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 'after explicit confirm=true' phrasing gives a precondition for calling, but there is no guidance on when to pin vs. other Mastodon actions, no exclusions, and no mention of prerequisites like prior account selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.