business_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'paginate' which hints at pagination behavior, but doesn't explain what 'Business Owner Posts' actually are, what format they return in, whether there are rate limits, authentication requirements, or any other operational characteristics. The incomplete ending further reduces clarity.

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 technically brief but suffers from poor structure and an incomplete ending with a stray quote mark. While it's only one sentence, the abrupt cutoff makes it feel unfinished rather than concise. Every sentence should earn its place, but this one doesn't feel properly completed.

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 tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'Business Owner Posts' are, what the output looks like, or provide any context about the data source or limitations. The incomplete ending further reduces completeness. With rich sibling tools available, more context is needed to understand this tool's specific role.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents all four parameters. The description doesn't add any meaningful parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema - it doesn't explain how parameters interact or provide usage examples. With complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Get all / paginate') and resource ('Business Owner Posts'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from potential siblings like 'business_details' or 'business_reviews' that might also retrieve business-related information, and the description ends abruptly with an incomplete quote mark.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'business_details', 'business_reviews', and 'business_photos' available, there's no indication whether this tool is for posts specifically, how it differs from other business data retrieval tools, or any prerequisites for use.

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