get_company_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'Returns cleaned data in TOON format,' which adds some behavioral context about output formatting. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior (beyond parameters), or what 'cleaned' entails, leaving gaps for a tool with 8 parameters.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get posts from a LinkedIn company page') and adds value with output format details. There is no wasted text, making it appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimal but covers purpose and output format. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., auth needs, rate limits) and usage guidelines, making it adequate but with clear gaps for a data-fetching tool.

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 fully documents all 8 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying company identification and data cleaning, which are already covered in schema descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('posts from a LinkedIn company page'), specifying the source and what is retrieved. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_post' (single post) or 'get_profile_posts' (profile posts), but doesn't explicitly contrast with 'search_posts' (which might search across companies).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_posts' or 'get_company' (which might get company info, not posts). The description implies it's for company-specific posts, but lacks explicit context or exclusions for usage.

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