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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: ordering is newest first, scheduled posts include publish time, and pages are capped at 50 with cursor passthrough for pagination.

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 reasonably short and front-loads the core purpose, but the first two sentences redundantly repeat 'Posts of your publication, newest first.' That duplication wastes space without adding information.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete: it covers ordering, returned fields (status and audience), scheduled publish time, and pagination behavior. Full return shape is not described, but no output schema exists to compensate for that.

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 the schema already documents limit, cursor, and status. The description reinforces pagination and status filtering, but it introduces a naming mismatch by saying 'pass next_cursor back as cursor' when the parameter is simply named cursor, which slightly weakens clarity.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('lists posts of your publication') and adds useful scope details ('newest first, with status and audience'). It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_post or list_notes, but the listing purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied through 'Filter by status to see drafts or scheduled posts' and the pagination note, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as get_post for a single post. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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