x_api_stream_posts_firehose

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries behavioral disclosure. It specifies read-only risk, required bearer token, environment-selection behavior, expected response shape, common failures, and a safety warning about sensitive data. This goes far beyond basic read/write classification.

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 structured with clear labeled sections (Risk, Required permissions, Parameter formats, etc.), front-loads the primary purpose, and each sentence adds unique value. Despite its length, it remains concise and well-organized.

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 complex streaming tool with 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is remarkably complete. It covers prerequisites, environment selection, parameter formats, response shape, failure conditions, safety, and an example, leaving little ambiguity for the agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by detailing formats and constraints for key parameters (backfill_minutes, partition, start_time, end_time) and explaining the role of scopeTenantId, scopeUserId, scopeAccountId, and credentialKey. However, it leaves authorizationKey and preferredAuthType unaddressed, which is a minor gap.

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 'Stream all Posts,' which clearly identifies the verb (stream) and resource (all Posts). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from language-specific firehose siblings (e.g., x_api_stream_posts_firehose_en), making the scope somewhat ambiguous. The purpose is clear but lacks explicit sibling 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 provides a 'Do not use when' clause directing users to x_schema_discovery or x_query_suggestion for exploration, and recommends prerequisite tools. However, it does not address when to use this firehose vs. sample streams or language-specific firehose variants, leaving a gap in alternative selection.

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