Ghost MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read operation ('retrieves') but lacks details on authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or return format. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action, which is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 that front-loads the key action ('retrieves a single post') and includes essential details ('from Ghost CMS by ID or slug'). There is no wasted wording, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks information on behavioral aspects like response format or error conditions, which would be helpful for completeness in a read operation context.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameters need documentation. The description adds value by specifying that retrieval can be 'by ID or slug', which clarifies the expected input semantics despite the empty schema, compensating appropriately.

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 'retrieves' and the resource 'a single post from Ghost CMS', specifying it can be done 'by ID or slug'. It distinguishes from siblings like ghost_get_posts (plural) by emphasizing 'single post' and from ghost_search_posts by focusing on direct retrieval rather than search.

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 for retrieving a specific post when you have its ID or slug, which differentiates it from ghost_get_posts (for listing) and ghost_search_posts (for query-based searches). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, leaving some ambiguity.

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