x_api_stream_posts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and excels: it discloses read-only risk, bearer token requirement, environment-selection behavior, expected response shape, common failure conditions, and safety warnings about sensitive data. This goes well beyond minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 labeled sections and front-loaded purpose. It is mostly efficient, but the 'Use when: Stream filtered Posts' line is redundant with the first sentence, and 'Risk: read-only' is repeated in the safety warning, keeping it from a perfect score.

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 is remarkably complete for a complex tool with no annotations or output schema: it covers purpose, auth prerequisites, scoping behavior, response shape, failure conditions, and an example. However, it omits the need to configure filtering rules (e.g., via x_api_update_rules) and leaves authorizationKey/preferredAuthType undefined, so it is not fully complete.

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%, and the description compensates by explaining the scopeTenantId/scopeUserId/scopeAccountId/credentialKey selection behavior and providing formats for backfill_minutes, start_time, and end_time. However, authorizationKey and preferredAuthType are not explained, leaving a notable gap for a 9-parameter tool.

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 starts with 'Stream filtered Posts,' which uses a specific verb and resource and hints at a distinct filtered-stream capability. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling stream tools like x_api_stream_posts_firehose or x_api_stream_posts_sample, so the distinction is implied rather than stated.

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 'Use when' and 'Do not use when' sections, and it recommends x_schema_discovery or x_query_suggestion for exploration. However, the 'Use when' clause is tautological ('Stream filtered Posts'), and the exclusion focuses on exploration/auth configuration rather than comparing with other stream tools, making the guidance useful but not fully targeted.

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