social_media_posting_get_csv_post

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true). The description adds nothing beyond the name – it doesn't mention return format, pagination, or any specific behavior. It provides no additional context beyond what annotations already convey.

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 extremely brief ('Get CSV Post') – it is concise but under-specifies. It conveys almost no information beyond the tool name, making it more of a placeholder than a helpful description.

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 read tool with no output schema and 4 parameters, this description is grossly insufficient. It fails to explain what a 'CSV Post' is, what the response will contain, or how the filtering parameters work. An agent has no idea what to expect or how to call it 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?

Schema description coverage is 50% (id and locationId have descriptions; skip and limit do not). The description doesn't add any parameter details – it doesn't clarify what 'CSV Id' means or explain the role of skip/limit. Since coverage is low, the description should compensate but does not.

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 a verb 'Get' and a resource 'CSV Post', but 'CSV Post' is ambiguous and not clearly distinguished from siblings like social_media_posting_get_post. It does imply a specific category (CSV-related), but the term is unexplained, so it's not a tautology yet lacks precise differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of scenarios, prerequisites, or comparisons to get_post or get_posts. The description provides zero context for selection.

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