Repost

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

Annotations already declare destructive=false, idempotent=true, readOnly=false, openWorld=true. The description adds a concrete behavioral fact beyond them: 'Reposting twice is harmless,' which reinforces the idempotency hint in plain language. It does not cover auth or rate limits, but the annotations carry the safety profile.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed by the idempotency reassurance and the alternative-tool routing. No waste.

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 simple two-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description is complete enough to call correctly. No output schema exists, but the tool returns little that needs explaining. Minor gap: no mention of what happens if the post is already reposted vs. this being harmless.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema, including the account default and the list_accounts reference. The description adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (repost) and resource (a post), and clarifies the effect: it goes to your followers. It explicitly distinguishes itself from create_post with quote, so an agent can tell it apart from the sibling that produces a comment-bearing repost.

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?

Gives explicit routing: use this to repost, use create_post with `quote` when you want to add a comment. That is a when-to-use-this-vs-alternative instruction, not mere inference.

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