linkedin_get_user_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions pagination behavior but omits details like rate limits, authentication requirements (accessToken is required but implied), post ordering, or additional side effects.

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?

Single sentence with no redundant words. Efficiently conveys the core purpose and a key behavior (pagination).

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should hint at return format. It does not. The tool is simple but lacks information about what the response contains (e.g., list of posts, metadata). Adequate but incomplete given no output schema.

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 coverage is 100%, with each parameter described (accessToken, count, start). The description adds 'with pagination' which aligns with start and count, but does not provide extra semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Get user's own posts with pagination' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'linkedin_get_feed' (likely for feed posts). The emoji adds a helpful visual cue.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No explicit 'when not to use' or comparison to siblings such as 'linkedin_get_feed'. The agent must infer context from the name alone.

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