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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description only needs to add context. It adds the returned fields, but it does not disclose edge-case behaviors such as not-found handling, permission requirements, or whether 'platform results' are always present. This is adequate but not rich.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the operation and resource, then lists the key returned details. Every part earns its place and there is no redundant wording.

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 read-by-ID tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it states what is returned and the annotations cover safety. 'Platform results' could be slightly more specific given the list_post_results sibling, but the overall context is sufficient.

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?

The only parameter, id, is already fully described in the schema as 'The post ID', with 100% schema description coverage. The description reinforces that the tool fetches by ID but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly identifies a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('details of a single post by ID'), and enumerates the included fields (status, caption, media, platform results). This distinguishes it from list-oriented siblings like list_posts and list_post_results.

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 'single post by ID' implies that this tool is for retrieving a specific post rather than listing posts, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. Usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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