Historique des publications

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'recent' but does not define recency; it lists statuses but not exhaustively. Lacks details on sorting, pagination beyond limit, or whether drafts are included. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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?

A single concise sentence that conveys the core purpose. It is front-loaded with key information. However, it could be slightly more structured by explicitly listing included statuses or mentioning the default limit.

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 simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essence: history of recent publications with statuses. It is complete enough for the agent to understand the tool's purpose, though adding default limit and sorting behavior would enhance completeness.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters (limit and search) with descriptions. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting baseline but no added value.

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 clearly states it retrieves history of recent publications, including statuses like published and failures. The verb 'get' and resource 'post history' are explicit, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'list_scheduled_posts' or 'publish_post'.

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 context is implied: it is for viewing recent post history. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives, such as when to use 'list_scheduled_posts' for scheduled posts. No exclusions or recommendations are provided.

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