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

Since no annotations are provided, the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the tool supports filtering by type, pagination, and account filtering, which are behavioral traits. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, any authentication requirements, or the response structure, leaving some gaps.

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 two concise sentences with no fluff. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the supporting details are compact and easy to parse.

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 relatively simple list operation with 4 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the core functionality and key filtering options. It lacks details like response format, but given the simplicity, it is reasonably complete.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explicitly listing the type values (scheduled, draft, published, awaiting_approval) and mentioning 'pagination' (which covers page and limit) and 'account filtering' (which covers account_id). This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage by providing context for each 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?

The description clearly states the verb ('List') and the resource ('posts'), and specifies the filtering criteria by type with explicit values (scheduled, draft, published, awaiting_approval). It also mentions pagination and account filtering, which differentiates it from sibling tools like list_queue_posts or list_top_posts.

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 on when to use this tool: when you need posts filtered by type, pagination, or account. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is sufficiently clear to guide selection.

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