get_recent_postsReturn recent or popular public KimchiSushi community posts without a keyword search.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| category | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| note | Yes | ||
| posts | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds that posts are 'public' and that no keyword search is involved, but it does not disclose additional behavioral details like pagination or how sorting works beyond the schema enum. With strong annotations, this is acceptable but not highly informative.
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?
The description is a single, clear sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and scope. It is concise, front-loaded, and has 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 that the output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the description is largely complete for a simple read-only listing tool. It conveys the core purpose and scope, though parameter usage is left to inference from enums. The lack of explicit parameter documentation is a minor gap, but overall the tool is well-contextualized.
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 0%, and the description does not explain the 'limit' or 'category' parameters. The phrase 'recent or popular' only loosely relates to the 'sort' enum, but does not map 'popular' to the actual enum value 'hot'. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.
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 uses a specific verb 'Return' and clearly specifies the resource: 'recent or popular public KimchiSushi community posts'. It also explicitly excludes keyword search, distinguishing this tool from the sibling 'search' tool. This is a clear, well-scoped purpose.
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 phrase 'without a keyword search' provides a clear exclusion, indicating this tool is for browsing recent/popular public posts rather than performing keyword-based searches. It doesn't explicitly name the alternative 'search' tool, but the context is clear enough to guide when to use this tool.
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.
Most tools are clearly distinct (search, recent posts, health check, routing), but fetch and get_post_with_comments both retrieve posts, differing only by id type and whether comments are included. This overlap could cause misselection, though the descriptions help.
Naming styles are mixed: bare verbs (fetch, search), get_ prefixed names (get_post_with_comments, get_recent_posts), and a long noun-like name (get_kimchisushi_agent_entrypoints). The inconsistent use of verbs and prefixes makes the pattern unpredictable.
With 6 tools, the server is well-scoped for a read-only content access service. Each tool serves a clear purpose without redundancy or excessive sprawl.
The tool surface covers the core lifecycle for the domain: searching, fetching individual items, listing recent items, and routing to relevant areas. No obvious gaps for a read-only information retrieval service.