Apply the single human-confirmed publication

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

Adds behavior the annotations do not: human-approval gating, the default local publish target, that resuming with the same operationId skips completed stages, and that it never merges or executes plotting code. It leaves out what 'publish locally' actually writes and why destructiveHint is false despite a write.

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?

Four tight sentences with no filler, and the gating precondition is front-loaded before the behavior claims. A few phrases ('host completes its Gallery actions') are jargon-heavy for the space they take.

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?

Covers approval gating, target selection, idempotent resume, and side-effect limits, which is most of what matters for a multi-stage publish. Still missing the meaning of acceptSimilarCandidates, what local publishing writes or returns, and how this differs from the other apply-publish siblings.

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 carry the parameter burden, and it only partly does. It explains by name that the same operationId resumes completed stages, hints the planDigest binds the approved plan, but says nothing at all about acceptSimilarCandidates.

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 the action concretely: it publishes the plan that was confirmed, locally by default, or opens a Module PR when the plan explicitly includes one. That is specific enough to act on, but it never names the overlapping siblings (apply_publication_pr, apply_publish_working_revision), so an agent choosing between them has to infer the boundary.

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?

Gives real preconditions: only after the user approves the exact plan and the host finishes its Gallery steps, plus a clear rule that a planned Open Module PR does not need a second approval. It does not state when to prefer this over the PR-specific or working-revision publish siblings.

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