mfuns_create_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It adds valuable behavioral details: Markdown is auto-converted, category_id falls back to the first leaf child if a parent is given, copyright defaults to 2 (original), and draft=True only saves without publishing. These go beyond the schema, though auth prerequisites and error behavior are not mentioned.

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 opens with a crisp one-sentence purpose, then uses a structured Args list to convey parameter details. Each line is informative and necessary, with no redundant prose. The category example adds practical context without bloat.

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 create operation with an output schema and no annotations, the description covers all parameter semantics and key behavioral defaults (category fallback, draft, copyright). It omits broader context like authentication requirements or when to use it, but the invocation details are sufficiently complete for correct tool use.

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%, but the Args section fully compensates. It explains the 30-character title limit, Markdown support, category_id semantics with numeric examples, the 10-tag limit, copyright value mapping, cover URL scheme (https), and draft default behavior. Every parameter receives meaningful elaboration beyond its type.

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 '发布文章帖子' (publish article post), specifying it accepts plain text or Markdown with server-side conversion. This precise verb+resource distinguishes it from sibling tools like mfuns_publish_video and mfuns_create_feed.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply lists arguments without mentioning use cases, exclusions, or situations where another sibling tool would be more appropriate, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name alone.

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