List Posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds ordering and the presence of engagement counts, but says nothing about result-set size, pagination flow, or whether unpublished/draft posts are excluded from the 'published' claim.

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?

One sentence with no waste, and the key scope facts — published-only, newest first, engagement counts — are front-loaded before any reader would need to open the schema.

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?

With a full output schema and rich annotations, the description only needs to frame what the call returns, which it does. The remaining gap is pagination behavior and the exact boundary of 'published', both minor given the schema's after/limit documentation.

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 description coverage is 100%, with page, after and limit each documented including cursor chaining and the 1-100 limit range. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('List a Page's published posts') plus two scoping facts an agent needs: ordering ('newest first') and returned content ('engagement counts'). It distinguishes itself from list_scheduled_posts by the word 'published', though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 rather than stated — an agent infers this is the tool for enumerating a Page's feed, and 'published' implicitly excludes scheduled/draft content. There is no explicit when-not or pointer to get_post for single items or list_scheduled_posts for queued content.

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