cc98_get_posts

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

The description discloses that output is plain text (UBB cleaned) and mentions pagination behavior via from. However, it does not discuss error handling, authentication, or rate limits. Given no annotations, it still provides useful behavioral context.

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: the first front-loads the core purpose, the second provides additional usage details and sibling references. Every sentence is necessary and concise, with no wasted words.

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 explains the tool's output format, pagination, and references for media, which is adequate for a tool with no output schema. However, it could further clarify the structure of returned data (e.g., array of posts). Overall, it provides a solid mental model.

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?

Though the schema already describes all three parameters (100% coverage), the description adds contextual meaning by explaining pagination (from=10,20) and clarifying that size is the number of floors. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 reads floor content of a topic post, specifies that UBB is cleaned to plain text, and notes that floor 1 is the main post. It distinguishes itself from siblings by referencing cc98_get_image and cc98_download for handling images and files within the content.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (to read floor content) and when not to (for images/files, use other tools). It also provides pagination guidance with the from parameter, enhancing usability.

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