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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing about default behavior with no filters (return all posts for the site?), result volume, pagination, or ordering, which are the remaining behavioral unknowns.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, with the filters as the trailing qualifier. No filler, though it is on the terse side for a 5-parameter tool.

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 and zero schema description coverage across five parameters, the description should say what a post record contains and that results are scoped by required projectId/siteId and whether unfiltered calls return everything. None of that is present, so an agent must guess at scoping and result shape.

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%, so the description must compensate; it maps three of the five params (campaignId, statuses, platform) to plain-language filters. It does not explain that projectId and siteId are required scoping identifiers, leaving a gap, but the compensation is meaningful.

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) and resource (social posts), with the filterable dimensions named. It is distinguishable from neighbors like list_distribution_campaigns and list_distribution_pages, though it never explicitly says so.

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 'by campaign, status, or platform' implies the intended filtering use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no named alternative (e.g., get_distribution_status) for fetching a single post's state.

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