Undo a repost

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds little beyond restating the action; it does not explain what happens if no repost exists (relevant given idempotentHint=true), nor permission/ownership requirements.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though arguably too terse to carry any differentiating or scoping 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?

For a simple two-parameter mutation with a fully described schema and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It omits the idempotent-no-op behavior and the multi-account ownership semantics that an agent would benefit from knowing.

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 'uri' and 'account' are fully documented in the schema, including the 'list_accounts' pointer. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so 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+resource ('Remove your repost of a post'), and the inverse relationship to the sibling 'repost' is implicit in the name/title. However, it never explicitly names 'repost' as the counterpart operation, so an agent must infer the pairing from the names alone.

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 purpose implies when to use it (undoing a prior repost), but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives. In particular, it never clarifies that this targets your own repost rather than another account's, leaving the multi-account case to inference.

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