Publish to dochost

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

Beyond the annotations (mutating, open-world, non-destructive), the description discloses plan-dependent behavior, the default branding behavior, and how the host is resolved. This gives the agent a clear picture of what happens for free vs paid plans and where the URL will be issued.

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?

Three sentences with no filler; the main purpose is front-loaded and every sentence adds useful information. The structure is easy to scan and understand.

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?

With an output schema and annotations present, the description covers the key decisions: input format, plan limits, branding, and host resolution. The main gap is the undocumented public parameter and the lack of error or edge-case behavior, but the description is still strong and mostly self-sufficient.

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 parameter meaning. It clarifies noBranding semantics and says password, customSlug, and branding respect plan limits, but it does not explain the public parameter, password constraints, or customSlug format.

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 first sentence states a specific action ('Publish') and resource ('hosted dochost page') plus the outcome ('shareable URL'). This clearly differentiates it from the list/get/update/delete sibling tools.

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 provides useful context about plan entitlements and tells the agent to use get_account to learn the host, but it never explicitly says when to use publish versus update_page or when publishing is not allowed. Usage must be inferred rather than explicitly routed.

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