Publish Knowledge Article

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It includes a clear warning about public visibility and need for review, which adds value beyond the schema. However, it does not mention reversibility, permission requirements, or side effects like triggers or notifications.

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 plus a warning, all front-loaded with the core action. Every word is necessary; no fluff.

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 simplicity of the tool (state change), the description covers the effect and a warning. It could explicitly state the article must be in 'draft' state, but this is implied. No output schema, but return value is likely straightforward.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning to the parameters (instance and sys_id) beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action ('Publish a draft knowledge article') and the mechanism ('setting its workflow_state to published'), with the effect of making it visible to end users. This distinguishes it from siblings like create_kb_article or update_kb_article.

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 use when a draft article is ready, but does not explicitly state prerequisites (e.g., article must be in draft state), when not to use, or alternatives. It lacks guidance on context and exclusions.

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