Create a tag

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the publication-scoping context and the ordering prerequisite, but says nothing about duplicate-name behavior, failure modes, or whether the created tag is returned.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste, with the core action front-loaded and the prerequisite second. Nothing is repeated from the title or annotations.

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 two-parameter creation tool with complete schema coverage and annotations carrying the mutation semantics, this is sufficient. Duplicate handling and return shape are the only gaps, and neither is required to invoke it correctly.

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%, with both `name` and the optional `publication` (including its loose hostname matching and default) fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, 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 concrete verb and resource ("Create a new tag") scoped to the publication, and the second sentence implicitly distinguishes it from add_tag_to_post by describing the prerequisite relationship. It stops short of naming sibling tools, so an agent must infer the workflow ordering, but the action itself is unambiguous.

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?

"A tag must exist before it can be put on a post" implies the use case (create first, then attach) but never states when *not* to use it, nor names an alternative such as checking list_publication_tags first to avoid duplicates. Usage is inferable rather than explicit.

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