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

The description adds the behavioral detail of ordering by queue position, which is useful. However, with no annotations, it does not disclose pagination behavior (the schema has a limit with default 20), whether the operation is read-only, or any auth requirements. It carries some burden but leaves significant 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 a single, efficient sentence with no filler. It is appropriately short for the tool's simplicity and front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary detail.

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 list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is partially complete. It covers the main function and ordering but lacks mention of the default limit (20), pagination behavior, and what the response contains. Given the lack of an output schema, the agent might not know what to expect in the return value.

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 explain the parameters. It only indirectly references queue_id via 'specific custom publishing queue' but does not describe the format or constraints, and it completely omits the limit parameter. The agent receives no parameter guidance beyond the schema's field names and types.

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 action: list posts in a specific custom publishing queue, with an explicit ordering by queue position. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_posts by specifying the queue context, so an agent can tell it apart.

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 implies usage when a queue_id is known, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_posts or provide any exclusions. The context is clear but no guidance is given about when not to use it or when to prefer a different sibling.

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