x_api_search_posts_recent

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses read-only status, required auth tokens and scopes, environment-selection behavior, common failure conditions, and safety warnings about sensitive data. This goes well beyond a basic 'read-only' label.

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-structured with clear labeled sections (Use when, Risk, Required permissions, Parameter formats, etc.). It is lengthy but justified given 15 parameters and no annotations. Some redundancy exists, e.g., read-only mentioned twice, but overall it is organized and front-loaded.

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 includes expected response shape, failure conditions, permissions, environment-selection behavior, and an example, making it quite complete for a tool without an output schema. Gaps remain: it does not define the 'recent' window or explicitly compare with x_api_search_posts_all.

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?

The description lists parameter formats and constraints, adding 'query' location and requiredness beyond the schema. However, it does not explain the meaning of parameters like start_time, since_id, or pagination_token, and omits some auth-related parameters from the list. With 0% schema coverage, this is partial compensation.

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 states 'Search recent Posts,' which clearly identifies the verb and resource. It distinguishes from x_api_search_posts_all via the 'recent' qualifier, but does not explicitly name the sibling or define what 'recent' means, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

It provides a 'Do not use when' section recommending x_schema_discovery or x_query_suggestion for exploration, and lists prerequisite/follow-up tools. However, the 'Use when' is tautological ('Search recent Posts'), and there is no explicit direction to use x_api_search_posts_all for full-archive searches.

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