get_post

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

Despite no annotations, the description declares read-only behavior and provides ID format example. It does not cover errors or auth, but for a simple read tool this is solid. Adds context beyond the bare schema.

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?

Three compact sentences: functional header, data fields, cross-references. Every sentence adds distinct value without repetition. Ideal length.

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, the description lists returned fields. It also informs about what is not included (body, comments) and directs to relevant tools. Covers all essential aspects for a single-param retrieval tool.

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 has 0% coverage, but description adds value by specifying the ID format (12+ char hex) and giving an example. This helps the agent construct correct inputs beyond just the parameter name.

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 (read-only retrieval) and resource (story metadata by post id), lists returned fields, and distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning get_post_content and list_responses. This makes the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use this tool (for metadata) and when to use alternatives (get_post_content for body, list_responses for comments). Also indicates read-only nature, guiding appropriate usage.

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