substack_publication_posts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It covers pagination ('Returns one page'), the specific fields returned, paywall status, and the search no-match behavior. It does not describe pagination metadata or sort-mode semantics, but the key operational traits are disclosed.

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 three sentences with no filler. The core operation is front-loaded, the return fields are enumerated compactly, and the search edge case is included without bloating the text.

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 there is no output schema, the description usefully lists the returned fields and clarifies the one-page and search-empty behaviors. It is nearly complete, but it does not mention whether the response includes pagination metadata such as a next-page indicator, which would matter for an agent iterating through an archive with limit and offset.

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 all parameters. The description adds useful context for `search` by explaining that it performs full-text filtering over the publication's own posts and returns an empty list on no matches, but it adds little beyond the schema for `sort`, `limit`, `offset`, or `publication`.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List a Substack publication's public post archive.' It also enumerates the returned fields (title, subtitle, canonical URL, publish date, engagement counts, paywall status), which makes the tool's scope clear and distinguishes it from sibling tools like substack_post or substack_publication.

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 clear context for using the tool and explains the search parameter's behavior, including the empty-result edge case. However, it never explicitly says when to choose this tool over sibling alternatives such as substack_search, substack_post, or substack_publication, so the usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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