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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the 50-post corpus cap, case-insensitive substring matching semantics, engagement-based result ordering, and the free-account/sign-in requirement plus its fallback. It omits error behavior for an invalid or expired preview_id, which is the remaining gap.

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?

Two dense sentences, zero filler; the scope limit and matching semantics are front-loaded and the auth caveat comes last where it belongs. Nothing is repeated from the schema verbatim.

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 2-parameter search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the corpus boundary, match semantics, ordering, and auth flow — everything an agent needs to decide to call it and to interpret the result set.

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 earns above baseline by defining how `query` is applied (case-insensitive substring match over post text) rather than just restating the length constraint. `preview_id` provenance ('from preview_profile') is also reinforced beyond the schema's equivalent note.

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 ('Keyword search over ... posts') plus a precise scope: only the latest 50 posts of a *previewed* profile. The parenthetical '(from preview_profile)' ties it to the sibling that creates the required handle, so it is clearly distinguishable from search_posts and linkedin_post_search.

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 a real prerequisite chain (must call preview_profile first to obtain preview_id) and an explicit fallback path when the client cannot prompt sign-in ('otherwise use continue_url from preview_profile'). It does not explicitly say when to prefer search_posts over this, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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