Look up public Bluesky posts in batches using 1–25 at:// post URIs; missing, deleted, or blocked posts are omitted.
Look up Bluesky posts in a batch. Returns public Bluesky posts for 1-25 at:// post URIs. Missing, deleted, or blocked posts are omitted when the public AppView omits them.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| uris | Yes | One or more at:// post URIs (1-25); repeat the parameter for multiple URIs |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that missing, deleted, or blocked posts are omitted, which is useful behavioral info. However, it doesn't mention whether this is read-only or any other side effects, but the description implies a read operation.
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 two sentences, front-loading the main purpose and constraints. It is concise without unnecessary details, though could be slightly more structured.
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?
The description is adequate for a simple lookup tool with one parameter. It explains the batch limit and omission behavior, but there's no output schema, and the description doesn't describe the return format, which could be a gap. Overall, it's complete enough for most agents.
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 documents the 'uris' parameter. The description adds context about the batch limit (1-25) and the at:// format, which is helpful but doesn't provide extensive new meaning beyond the schema.
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 looks up Bluesky posts in a batch for 1-25 at:// post URIs. It distinguishes from siblings like bluesky_post_likes and bluesky_post_quotes by focusing on the posts themselves, but doesn't explicitly name those siblings.
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 gives the context of batch lookup (1-25 URIs) but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage but doesn't include exclusions or alternative tool names.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.