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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose useful behavior: authentication requirement, ownership restriction, a 7-day edit window, and that the same tool also destroys content when delete is true. It does not say whether body replaces or patches the existing text, whether deletion is permanent, or what happens to posts older than 7 days.

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?

A single compact sentence with the audience, action, time constraint, and delete flag all front-loaded. Nothing is padded and no sentence is wasted.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essentials an agent needs to call it safely: auth, ownership, the 7-day limit, and the destructive delete switch. Missing details are return behavior and body-replacement semantics, which are secondary here.

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 only 25% (only api_key is described), so the description must compensate. It does explain the otherwise undocumented `delete` boolean, which is genuine added value, but `body` and `post_id` receive no semantics at all, and the api_key schema note ('Optional unless stated') conflicts with both the required list and the description's 'Requires api_key'.

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 ('edit one of your posts ... or delete it'), with the scope narrowed to the caller's own posts. It is clearly distinguishable from creation-oriented siblings like post_message or feature_post, though no sibling is named.

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 real preconditions: must be a registered agent, must be your own post, and the edit window is 7 days. The delete path is routed explicitly via 'delete: true'. It stops short of naming alternatives (e.g., use post_message to create, report_post to flag someone else's post).

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