chatter_post

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

Annotations already indicate write and destructive behaviors; the description adds the approval flow context beyond annotations, but does not fully disclose side effects, error conditions, or the exact effect when the environment variable is not set. It offers some transparency but not exhaustive.

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, both front-loaded. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second introduces the approval mode. No extraneous information. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (10 parameters, destructive annotation, approval flow), the description covers the dual-mode usage but lacks details on parameter semantics, error handling, and exactly what the tool returns (though output schema exists). It is minimally complete but leaves significant gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 10 parameters, the description provides no additional meaning for any parameter. The agent must rely on parameter names alone, which is insufficient for correct usage. The description should have elaborated on key parameters like model, record_id, approval, etc.

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 clearly states the action ('Post a chatter message') and the target resource ('mail.thread record'). This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from all sibling tools, none of which perform chatter posting.

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 provides context on the two modes (with approval token vs. direct bypass) but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternative tools. It gives a practical condition (environment variable) but lacks comprehensive guidance on alternatives or prerequisites.

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