Apply drafted copy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool writes into pages and preserves a backup for 'sweipe_brief_undo', and it explains the optional partial-apply behavior. It could add backup lifespan or response details, but the key side effects and recoverability are covered.

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 with no filler. The main behavior and backup side effect are front-loaded, and the optional parameter option is presented in the second sentence.

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 a write/apply tool, the description gives the agent enough to understand the workflow: apply stored drafts, optionally apply partial rows, and rely on the undo tool for backup. A return format is not described, and 'post_ids' semantics are left implicit, but these are not critical blockers.

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?

The schema describes 'items' meaningfully, and the description adds that 'items' applies an edited or partial set of rows per page rather than the whole draft. However, 'post_ids' has no schema description and the description does not explain the meaning of the 'id'/'new' row fields, leaving some semantics implicit.

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 opens with a specific action ('Write the stored drafts into the pages'), names the resource, and immediately differentiates itself from 'sweipe_brief_undo' by mentioning it creates the backup for that undo tool. This is clearly distinct from generating, picking, or undoing drafts.

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 gives clear context: use it to write stored drafts into pages, and use the optional 'items' parameter for edited or partial rows instead of the whole draft. It does not explicitly list when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the intended use is unambiguous.

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