solnk_publish

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the three publish modes and mentions that per-target overrides are possible, but it does not cover authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens on success (e.g., returns a publish ID). The behavioral description is functional but not exhaustive.

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 two sentences, front-loads the primary verb and scope, and every phrase adds value (modes, next steps, constraints). Zero wasted words.

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 complexity (6 parameters, nested `targets` object, enum), the description covers the essential workflow and mode distinctions. It names the follow-up tool for drafts. It does not describe the return format (e.g., a publish ID), but with no output schema, this is acceptable. A brief return note would make it a 5.

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 high (83%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the role of `publish_mode` in the workflow, the override relationship between top-level and per-target `content`/`media_ids`, and provides a reference link for `platform_settings`. This goes beyond simple schema repetition.

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 starts with a clear action verb ('Publish') and resource ('content'), specifies scope ('one or more platforms'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like `solnk_confirm_publish` and `solnk_cancel_publish` by naming them explicitly in the usage guidance.

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 explicitly tells when to use each `publish_mode` ('draft' to stage, 'scheduled' with `scheduled_at`, 'immediate') and names the sibling `solnk_confirm_publish` as the tool to follow after drafting, providing clear alternative context.

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