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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, and the description confirms non-mutating behavior by framing it as a check-before-change tool. It adds behavioral context beyond annotations by disclosing sort order (newest first) and the inclusion of destination delivery states, though pagination or result-size limits are not addressed.

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?

Two sentences carry the core behavior, the ordering guarantee, and the key usage scenario without wasted words. The most important information is front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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 parameters, a true read-only annotation set, and an output schema available, the description covers everything an agent needs: what the result contains, how it is ordered, and why/when to call it. There are no meaningful gaps for invoking this tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing the description must explain beyond the schema. The description correctly implies the scope is all posts in the user's workspaces, which is sufficient for a parameterless listing call.

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 identifies the resource (posts in workspaces) and the operation (listing), and adds distinctive details: newest-first ordering and per-destination delivery state. It clearly differentiates this listing tool from mutation siblings like posts_update and posts_cancel.

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?

It explicitly says when to call this tool: to check whether something published and before changing or cancelling anything. It also names the sibling tools that depend on the post_id obtained here, so an agent knows this is the lookup step before mutations.

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