Top UNCLAIMED posts in the owner's curated build order.
Owner-ranked posts (queue_rank, lower = sooner) come first, then
unranked planned posts by votes. Call this to find the next thing to
build, then claim_post before starting work.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | ||
| limit | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, but the description discloses sorting logic (owner-ranked then unranked by votes) and the intended workflow (call then claim). It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but for a read-only retrieval tool, the behavioral insight is sufficient.
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?
Very concise: one framing sentence followed by two short explanatory sentences. Front-loaded with the core purpose, then details. No wasted words.
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?
Given the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers purpose, ordering, and usage context. The lack of parameter descriptions is a minor gap, but overall it's complete for the tool's simplicity.
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 0% and the description does not explain the 'slug' (required) or 'limit' (optional) parameters. While the purpose is clear, the agent cannot infer what slug refers to without additional context.
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?
Clearly states it retrieves top unclaimed posts in the owner's curated build order, with a specific verb ('get') and resource ('queue'). Distinguishes from siblings like list_posts and claim_post by focusing on unclaimed and curated order.
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?
Explicitly tells when to call: 'Call this to find the next thing to build, then claim_post before starting work.' Provides a clear usage pattern and implies when not to use (if you just want to list posts, use list_posts).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
All tools have clearly distinct purposes. The board, post, comment, vote, analytics, changelog, queue, and utility tools each target different resources or actions without overlap.
Most tools follow verb_noun snake_case (e.g., create_board, get_post). Two tools (ping, whoami) are not verb_noun but are standard conventions, keeping overall consistency high.
22 tools is well-scoped for a feedback board management server. Each tool covers a distinct operation without unnecessary duplication or bloat.
Covers core lifecycle for boards (CRUD + publish/unpublish), posts (CRUD + claim/release + status proposal + evidence), and comments (create/list). Missing comment update/delete and vote creation, but these are minor gaps for the domain.