bluesky_author_feed

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that data is public and credential-free, returns pages (implying pagination), orders newest first, and lists included content types. It does not cover error behavior or rate limits, but for a simple read operation it is reasonably transparent.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action. However, the first sentence 'A Bluesky account's posts' is redundant with the second sentence's phrasing, creating minor repetition. Overall it is efficient and each sentence adds useful information.

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 simple read tool with no output schema, the description provides enough context: what it returns, ordering, and public/credential-free API source. It could mention pagination cursor handling more explicitly, but the schema already documents the cursor parameter, so the description is fairly complete.

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 descriptions cover all three parameters (actor, limit, cursor) at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about post content and ordering but does not add syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tool returns a page of a Bluesky account's posts, newest first, with specific content details (text, engagement counts, images/link cards/quoted posts). This distinguishes it from sibling Bluesky tools like profile, followers, or post thread by the resource it acts on.

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 for retrieving an account's post feed but does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or mention alternatives. No exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools are given, leaving usage primarily inferred from the name and resource description.

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