Get the visual preview (thumbnail image) of a post so the user can SEE it in the conversation. Works for the org's viral posts and for posts referenced by an assignment. Returns the image inline plus the video URL when available.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| post_id | Yes | Post id (UUID) from list_viral_posts, list_analyzed_posts or an assignment |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not required to restate safety. It adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: the tool 'returns the image inline plus the video URL when available', clarifying the output shape and the conditional nature of the video URL. This is valuable context for an agent invoking the tool.
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?
Three short sentences with no filler: the first states the core function and user benefit, the second specifies allowed post sources, and the third describes the return value. Each sentence contributes necessary information and is front-loaded appropriately.
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 simple one-parameter read-only tool, the description covers the essential invocation context: valid post sources and the expected return (inline image, optional video URL). It does not detail the exact inline format or error behavior, but given no output schema exists, the description is still sufficiently complete for an agent to call it effectively.
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 100%, and the post_id property is already described as a UUID from list_viral_posts, list_analyzed_posts, or an assignment. The tool description reinforces this source restriction but does not add new parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 and resource: 'Get the visual preview (thumbnail image) of a post', and clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools by emphasizing the inline image display for conversation. It also narrows scope to 'viral posts' and 'posts referenced by an assignment', making it unambiguous what this tool does and how it differs from downloads or analyses.
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 description provides clear context for when to use the tool: when the user needs to see a preview inline in the conversation, and specifically for posts from the org's viral list or assignments. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is strong enough to guide selection among siblings.
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.
Each tool has a distinct target resource/action, and the descriptions are unusually explicit about differences (e.g., 'Distinct from the watchlist', 'Separate list from list_tags'). A few pairs are still easy to confuse without careful reading: delete_folder vs delete_folders differ only by singular/plural, and the three download-URL tools (get_post_download_url, get_asset_download_url, get_my_account_post_download_url) plus the category/tag families require attention to pick correctly.
The snake_case verb_noun pattern is followed consistently throughout (list_*, get_*, create_*, update_*, delete_*, set_*, tag_*). Minor deviations: archive_folder and archive_my_accounts also perform restore despite their names, delete_folder/delete_folders split one operation by cardinality, and tag_posts/tag_my_account use a different verb style than the set_* family for metadata mutations.
At 56 tools, this far exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many,' even though the server spans multiple subdomains (watchlist, analysis, assignments, folders, my accounts, assets, Drive, categories/tags). Obvious consolidation candidates exist — delete_folder/delete_folders, the three download-URL getters, and the parallel list_my_account_* listers — and the sheer surface is heavy for an agent to navigate.
Core workflows are thoroughly covered with no dead ends: watchlist → analyze → assign → folder → track → approve has full lifecycle support, including reversible archive vs permanent delete choices. Minor gaps exist but are work-aroundable: no create/update for my accounts or models (app-side OAuth/admin only), no way to delete a viral post or a post note, and asset upload only happens in the app.
