write_post

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation creates a post and requires authentication, but omits any details about the response format, required auth state, side effects on related resources (e.g., series), or error behavior.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the operation and a key precondition (authentication). It contains no filler or redundant information.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description must explain return values and behavioral outcomes, but it only states the action and auth requirement. It does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., created post object), failure modes, or how authentication is supplied.

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%, and each parameter (title, body, tags, url_slug, series_id, is_private) is described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description starts with 'Create a new post on Velog', a specific verb+resource pair that clearly identifies the operation. The phrase 'new post' distinguishes it from sibling tools like edit_post, delete_post, and read_post.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: when creating a new post, and the sibling set (edit_post, delete_post, search_posts) makes the creation context obvious. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but 'new post' provides clear context.

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