list_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'your posts' indicates scope, including ownership. However, it does not disclose behavior like result ordering, pagination, or what happens when no posts exist, which could be useful context for this type of tool.

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, front-loaded clause with no wasted words. It is concise and immediately conveys the action and target. However, the mention of 'scheduled' instead of the schema's 'pending' is a minor accuracy issue that slightly detracts.

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 one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides a basic outline. It does not enumerate all statuses (leaving out 'pending' and 'cancelled') nor explain the return format. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, more detail would be helpful, but the tool's complexity is low.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description introduces confusion: 'scheduled' is not an enum value (the schema uses 'pending'), and it omits 'cancelled' and 'pending'. This misalignment reduces clarity beyond what the schema already provides, effectively harming parameter understanding.

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 states 'List your scheduled, published, or failed posts,' which clearly identifies the verb (list), resource (posts), and scope (your scheduled/published/failed). It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_connections' and 'publish_now'. However, it omits the 'cancelled' and 'pending' statuses from the schema, so it's not fully exhaustive.

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 listing posts, but does not mention alternatives or when not to use it. The schema's parameter description ('Omit to list all posts') adds some usage guidance, but there is no explicit comparison to sibling tools like 'list_connections' or 'cancel_post'.

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