Search LinkedIn posts by keyword. Returns post snippet, author name, headline, and profile URL. Uses Google indexing — no LinkedIn login required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Keyword or phrase to search for in LinkedIn posts | |
| maxResults | No | Max posts (default 25) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided. Description mentions 'uses Google indexing' and no login required, adding behavioral context. However, does not disclose limitations like incomplete coverage or rate limits, which would improve transparency.
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 sentences, no superfluous words. Purpose is stated upfront, making it easy to parse quickly.
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 no output schema, description hints at return fields. For a simple search tool with two params, this is fairly complete. Could add more on result limits or format, but adequate.
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% and descriptions in schema are adequate. Tool description does not add extra meaning beyond what schema already provides for 'query' and 'maxResults'.
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?
Verb 'search' and resource 'LinkedIn posts' are clear. Differentiates from siblings like 'search_linkedin_employees' and 'search_linkedin_jobs' by specifying 'posts' and mentioning returned fields (snippet, author, headline, URL).
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?
States 'uses Google indexing — no LinkedIn login required', which helps decide when to use (no login needed) and implies public posts. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions, but context is sufficient for differentiation.
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 target unique data sources or specific actions (e.g., search_zillow vs. get_zillow_property_details are clearly sequential). A few LinkedIn-related tools (find_linkedin_candidates vs. search_linkedin_employees) have overlapping purposes but their descriptions clarify distinct use cases. Overall, confusion is minimal and descriptions resolve ambiguity.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, using verbs like search, get, find, scrape, analyze, lookup, resolve, and verify. The pattern is predictable across the entire set, making it easy for an agent to infer function from name.
With 32 tools, the server exceeds the 'too many' threshold of 25+. While the broad scope of web data mining justifies some diversity, the count is unwieldy and could overwhelm an agent's selection process. A smaller, more focused set per domain would improve coherence.
The toolset covers a wide range of data retrieval needs: company research, real estate, job listings, academic research, and government records. For a read-only data aggregation service, there are no major lifecycle gaps, though some subdomains like social media scraping only cover Reddit and LinkedIn, missing other platforms. Overall, it is reasonably complete for its stated purpose.
