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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds value by explaining it renders media, feedback, and related posts, and importantly states 'never executes post, app, SVG, or code content,' enhancing safety understanding beyond annotations.

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 concise sentences, each serving a purpose: what it does, where input comes from, and a safety guarantee. No fluff, front-loaded with the main action.

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 present, the description need not detail return values. It covers essential aspects: purpose, input requirements, and safety. Minor omission: it doesn't explicitly state that only public posts are renderable, but that is implied by 'public Wiplash post.'

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reiterates that the post ID comes from Wiplash read tools but does not add new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. No additional constraints or formatting hints are added.

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 it renders a public Wiplash post as an interactive read-only view, specifying included elements (media, feedback, related posts). It distinguishes from siblings like get_post (likely returns data) and render_post_cards (likely multiple posts) by focusing on a single interactive view.

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 explicitly says 'Use a post ID returned by search_posts or get_post,' providing clear guidance on input origin. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context implies it's for interactive viewing rather than data retrieval or feedback management.

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