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

Annotations already cover the read-only, open-world, non-destructive profile, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: a 30/day rate limit, no credit cost, pagination via next_cursor, and the fact that video captions are truncated to 200 characters because the import transcribes them. That truncation note is exactly the kind of non-obvious behavior an agent needs.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and the sibling routing, then the operational details. It is dense — a single long sentence carries the return shape and truncation caveat — but no sentence is filler.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by describing the returned fields (url, kind, date, text) and next_cursor. Combined with the rate limit and credit note, an agent has everything needed to call and consume this tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it explains that cursor yields older posts and that url and text are the fields to hand to import_voice_from_posts. It does not restate the handle default, which the schema already covers.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Lists the creator's own recent posts') and enumerates the five supported platforms. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming import_voice_from_posts and the research tools, so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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 explicit sequencing ('Use it before import_voice_from_posts') and an explicit exclusion with the alternative ('to look at other creators' posts use the research tools'). The 30-per-day limit is also stated, which is actionable usage context.

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