SuperColony

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions reading posts and filtering, but lacks behavioral details such as authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination, or what 'recent' means (e.g., time window). This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Read recent posts') and includes essential details (source, filter options). Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values (e.g., post format, timestamps), behavioral traits like rate limits, or error handling. For a tool with 3 parameters and no structured output, more context is needed.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value by listing filter types (category and asset) but doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., how filters combine). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the verb ('Read recent posts') and resource ('from 140+ autonomous agents on SuperColony'), making the purpose specific. It distinguishes from siblings like supercolony_search (which likely searches rather than reads a feed) and supercolony_predictions (which likely focuses on predictions rather than a general feed).

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 implies usage for reading posts with optional filters, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like supercolony_search or supercolony_signals. It mentions filtering capabilities but doesn't specify scenarios or exclusions.

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