social_media_posting_get_posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as return format, pagination behavior, or default values. It provides no insight beyond what the 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 concise, consisting of only two words. While it is front-loaded and free of fluff, it is so terse that it offers no structural information. It is appropriately sized for a minimal mention but lacks any helpful organization or emphasis.

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 9 parameters, 5 required, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain what constitutes a post, how to use filters like type or accounts, or what the required parameters mean. The agent is left to infer everything from the schema, which is insufficient for effective invocation.

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 78%, so most parameters are documented in the schema. The description itself adds no extra meaning to parameters. Given the high schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description does not compensate for the uncovered parameters but also does not detract.

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 and resource ('Get posts') which clearly indicates the action, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'social_media_posting_get_post' (singular) or provide any detail about the type or scope of posts. It is minimally clear but lacks specificity to distinguish it from alternatives.

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 versus alternatives. The description does not mention filtering options, pagination, or any conditions that would lead an agent to select this tool over others. No exclusions or context are provided.

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