publish_post

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-read-only, non-destructive operation, so the description adds valuable context: it is described as 'irreversible-feeling,' it makes the post publicly visible, and future-dated publication leaves the post in SCHEDULED status. This complements the annotations without contradicting them.

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 compact and front-loaded: action first, human-confirmation caution second, scheduling detail third. Every sentence earns its place, and the RFC 3339 example is concrete and useful.

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 mutating publish tool with an output schema present, the description covers the preconditions (draft), the need for human confirmation, immediate vs. scheduled publishing behavior, and the resulting status. An agent has enough information to select and invoke the tool 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 0%, so the description carries the burden for parameter meaning. It thoroughly explains publish_date with RFC 3339 format, scheduling semantics, and resulting status. The blog_id and post_id are left implicit, but their names make them self-explanatory as identifiers.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and object: 'Publish a draft post,' and states the explicit outcome ('making it publicly visible'). This clearly separates it from siblings like update_post or revert_post, which modify content rather than changing visibility state.

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?

Provides explicit decision guidance: confirm with the human before calling unless publication was already requested, and use publish_date for scheduling instead of immediate publication. This tells an agent exactly when to invoke the tool and when to pause.

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