Search posts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that search covers 'public' posts and omits important behavioral details such as pagination via cursor, result shape, rate limits, or authentication requirements. This is insufficient given the absence of an output schema and annotations.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but it is also terse to the point of omitting useful context. It earns each word, yet the brevity limits its overall informational value.

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 has three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is underpowered. It does not explain what a search result looks like, how pagination works, or what limit/cursor parameters control, making it insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool with confidence in non-trivial scenarios.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any parameters. While 'query' can be inferred from 'full-text search', the semantics of 'limit' and 'cursor' (e.g., pagination behavior, defaults) are entirely undocumented, leaving the agent to guess.

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 a specific verb ('search') and resource ('public Bluesky posts'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_timeline and get_author_feed, which are feed-based rather than search-based. The public scope is also explicit.

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 full-text search queries but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives like get_author_feed or get_timeline, nor does it mention exclusion criteria. The context of 'full-text search' is a hint, but no direct comparative guidance is given.

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