x_api_get_lists_posts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states risk (read-only), required permissions and OAuth scopes, environment-selection behavior, expected response shape, common failure conditions, and safety warnings. This is exemplary in transparency, earning a 5.

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 well-organized into labeled sections and covers many aspects without unnecessary fluff. The only redundancy is the opening 'Get List Posts. Use when: Get List Posts.' which wastes a sentence. The rest is appropriately concise, earning a 4.

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 tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, the description provides response shape, failure modes, prerequisites, environment-selection behavior, and safety considerations. It leaves little ambiguity and is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly, earning a 5.

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 0%, but the description compensates by explaining 7 of 9 parameters: id, max_results, pagination_token, scopeTenantId, scopeUserId, scopeAccountId, and credentialKey. It describes their roles and constraints, though authorizationKey and preferredAuthType are not explicitly discussed. This is strong compensation, a 4.

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 'Get List Posts,' which is essentially a rephrasing of the tool name 'x_api_get_lists_posts.' It does not explain what list posts are or how this tool differs from sibling tools like x_api_get_posts_by_id or x_api_get_lists_by_id. The purpose is tautological, providing no real differentiation.

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 includes explicit 'Do not use when' guidance with alternatives (x_schema_discovery, x_query_suggestion) and lists recommended prerequisite and follow-up tools. However, the 'Use when' clause is just 'Get List Posts,' which is unhelpful. Overall, the exclusions and alternatives earn a 4.

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