get_post_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. "Check" implies a read-only operation and the description usefully names the kinds of information returned, but it does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or rate limits.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently covers the action, the target, and the information returned.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter read tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema. The description explains what information the tool surfaces, which is enough for an agent to call it correctly, though it could mention error behavior for invalid post IDs.

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 schema has 100% description coverage and clearly documents the single postId parameter. The description only says "for a specific post" and adds no further parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb ("Check") and resource ("publication status, external live URLs, and execution logs for a specific post"), making the tool's purpose clear. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools such as list_recent_posts, 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?

Usage is implied by "for a specific post," since the tool clearly applies when inspecting a known post. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like list_recent_posts, nor any exclusions.

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