create_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses default status (draft), tag auto-creation, meta field handling, and return includes preview_url. It does not mention rate limits, authentication, or destructive consequences beyond creation, but the core behavioral traits are well communicated.

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 three sentences (after the first line) and uses line breaks for readability. It is front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence provides essential information without redundancy. No filler 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 8 parameters, 1 required, no annotations, and an output schema exists, the description covers creation flow, default status, tag creation, and return summary. It could mention the behavior for excerpt or feature_image, but overall it provides a solid understanding of the tool's functionality.

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 0%, so description must explain parameters. It covers html (implied from 'HTML content'), tags (created if not exist), status (default and publish option), meta_title/meta_description (search metadata). However, it omits details for excerpt, feature_image, and the html default empty string. The description adds meaning but leaves some gaps.

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 'Create a blog post from HTML content', specifying the verb (create) and resource (blog post). It adds unique details like draft default and publishing behavior, which distinguish it from siblings like create_page or publish_post. The sibling list includes create_page and publish_post, but the description makes the tool's role explicit.

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 explains when to use: creating a new blog post, with default draft behavior and an option to publish immediately. It mentions tag creation and meta fields. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like create_page for pages or publish_post for publishing drafts, so an agent might not know the best alternative in all contexts.

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