get_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It indicates a read operation ('Get') and discloses the scope of returned data (votes, reactions, topic cluster, entities), but does not mention authentication, rate limits, errors, or behavior for deleted posts.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning, and the most important verb and object appear first.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool. It clearly states the purpose and the key return fields, though it could mention whether the full post body is included.

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 already describes post_id as 'The post ID to retrieve' (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific information, so it remains at baseline without enhancing the schema's meaning.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('full details for a single Resonate post'), and enumerates the included content ('votes, reactions breakdown, topic cluster, entities'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list_posts, search_posts, or get_reactions.

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 use when a complete view of one post is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives such as get_reactions or get_post_demographics. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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