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

Annotations already cover the read-only/no-destruction profile, but the description adds substantial extra context: the returned fields, the fact that view counts are absent because Post Insights don't support business posts, cursor-based pagination for older items, and the Cotlet API key/access requirement. These are non-obvious traits beyond structured data.

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?

Five short sentences, each carrying distinct information, with purpose and scope front-loaded. No filler or restatement of the name; the caveat about view counts and the auth note both earn their place.

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?

With no output schema present, the description compensates by enumerating returned fields and explicitly flagging the missing view-count data. Auth prerequisites and pagination mechanics are covered, leaving nothing an agent needs missing for a two-param read tool.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema for cursor ('read older posts'), clarifying its purpose as backward pagination, though it says nothing extra about the limit parameter.

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 (list) plus resource (posts), and scopes it precisely to 'Business posts from your Business Page, newest first'. This cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like nextdoor_get_post and nextdoor_create_post without opening their schemas.

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 clear operating context ('from your Business Page', 'Use the cursor to read older posts') that tells the agent when this is the right tool. It never explicitly names an alternative or a when-not condition (e.g., single-post retrieval via get_post), so it falls short of full routing guidance.

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