repost

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The 'dry_run' parameter hints at a post-verification mechanism, but the description doesn't mention side effects, whether the action is publish-immediate or draft, auth requirements, or what happens on failure. For a write action (reposting publicly), this is a meaningful gap.

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 efficient sentence that captures the essential purpose. It's front-loaded and wastes no words. It could include slightly more but remains appropriately sized for its simplicity.

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?

The tool is relatively simple (3 params, no output schema), but for a write action with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, it should address the dry_run behavior and any side effects more thoroughly. The description conveys the core purpose but lacks the behavioral depth needed for safe autonomous invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains post_url (the post to repost) and thought (optional text overlay), but doesn't clarify the dry_run parameter's behavior, which is non-obvious and left to the schema type (boolean) alone.

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 states a clear verb+resource action ('Repost (reshare) a LinkedIn post URL'), with an optional modifier ('with a thought'). It distinguishes reasonably from sibling tools like create_post, like_post, and comment_on_post, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from create_post, which could cause ambiguity.

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 implies when to use this tool (when a user wants to reshare an existing post), but it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternative tools like create_post for fresh content. No exclusions or alternative guidance is given.

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