create_article

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and adds useful behavior: articles are auto-filed under the default category, IDs and slugs are backend-generated, and image URLs must be hosted. It does not mention response format or publish/draft status, but it is fairly transparent for a create operation.

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 dense but not overly long, front-loading the core purpose and then giving pipeline details. The phrase 'Built via dashboard command pipeline' is somewhat vague, but the overall structure is efficient and each sentence adds relevant 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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the tool's purpose, key parameters, and prerequisite relationships with sibling tools. It lacks explicit return-value details or whether the article is immediately published, but it is reasonably complete for a create operation.

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?

The input schema already covers all parameters at 100% with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining where category_ids come from, emphasizing that image URLs must be hosted, and clarifying that summary is optional—all beyond the schema.

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 specific action ('Create a blog article') with the exact resource and purpose ('so blog/post pages have content'), naming concrete page types. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_article, delete_article, and list_articles.

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 gives clear context and directs the agent to source category_ids from create_blog_category and use hosted images from search_images/upload_images. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool (e.g., for editing an existing article, use update_article), so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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