Read a host's recent posts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the result shape constraints (capped at 20 posts, newest-first ordering), which is genuine behavioral context. It says nothing about permissions required, error behavior for an invalid or unknown host_id, or what an empty result means.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. The read behavior and constraints come first, and the usage trigger follows, so an agent gets the essential facts in reading order.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what it returns (20 recent posts, newest first), how to obtain the id, and when to invoke it. Only permission and failure-mode behavior are unaddressed, which is a minor gap for a read-only lookup.

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% and host_id is documented as a positive integer sourced from list_hosts. The description only echoes 'one of your hosts' without adding format, provenance, or edge-case detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting for a single documented parameter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read the 20 most recent posts'), plus scope details (20 items, newest first) that let an agent distinguish it from read_host_photos, read_chat_history, and instruct_post. The 'one of your hosts' phrasing also grounds it as a per-host lookup.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger: use it after an instruct_post timeout to verify whether the post actually published. This is concrete, workflow-anchored guidance rather than vague implication. It does not, however, state when NOT to use it or name a general-purpose alternative for reading posts outside the timeout-recovery case.

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