Create news article

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It explicitly says this operation creates (persists) a new store article, which is the primary, and points to the operation-schema requirement, a useful runtime detail. However, it gives no info about permissions, idempotency, irreversibility, or what is returned, so it is not fully transparent.

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 short sentences: the first names the action and target, the second gives the indispensable operation-schema reference. Every word carries the weight—no fluff, no repeated schema details.

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?

The description tells the agent how to get the required schema and what the tool does, but it leaves several practical gaps: there is no output schema, no mention of side effects besides creation, and no clue about what to do if the blog already exists (i.e. alternative update_blog). It is a defensible minimal viable definition but not complete for a description with zero annotations.

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 schema only describes the 'blog' nested object as 'News article matching the CreateBlog request error'. The description enriches this by directly telling the agent to call get_operation_schema("CreateBlog") to obtain the exact shape, which is the critical missing context. It doesn't enumerate all fields, but it points the agent precisely to where they can be resolved.

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 'Create a blog' gives a specific verb, resource, and scope—'store news article'—and naturally distinguishes it from sibling blog tools like get_blog, update_blog, and list_blogs, which have clearly different actions. The title 'Create news article' aligns with the description, so an agent can infer exactly what this tool creates.

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 clearly states the context—'Create a newsletter article'—and adds an effective procedural tip: call get_operation_schema("CreateBlog") before invocation, which is the key usage step. It does not explicitly exclude cases where the blog already exists or mention asking to modify an existing article, so it stops short of a 5.

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