Read a post

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description confirms 'Read-only' but adds no additional behavioral context such as authentication, rate limits, or response specifics. It is consistent with the annotations but contributes minimal extra value.

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, concise sentence that directly states the action and outcome. It is front-loaded with the key operation and contains no wasted words.

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 one-parameter read tool with annotations, the description covers the core function and mentions return content. However, the explicit statement 'Identical to open_post' creates ambiguity about tool selection and fails to justify the existence of both tools, leaving the context incomplete.

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 input schema already describes post_url as 'Permalink to the post' with 100% coverage. The description merely restates 'post by URL' without adding format, validation, or usage details, so it adds no extra 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 uses a specific verb 'fetch' and identifies the resource as a post by URL, stating it returns full content. However, it says 'Identical to open_post' without explaining any distinction, which slightly weakens its ability to uniquely identify the tool's purpose.

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 references 'open_post' as an identical alternative but provides no guidance on when to use this tool instead. It does not state any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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