filter_posts

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavior. It conveys a read-like filtering action but does not disclose whether it modifies state, requires authentication, or how results are paginated. It also does not mention any prerequisites beyond the schema's required network_id.

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, tight sentence that front-loads the action and lists all filter dimensions. It contains no filler or repeated information from 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?

For a simple filter tool, the description covers the basic purpose but omits return format, pagination, or any usage notes. Since there is no output schema, a bit more detail about what the filtered feed contains would improve completeness, though the core filtering behavior is adequately conveyed.

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%, with each parameter having a description, so the schema already explains the parameters. The description adds little beyond listing the filter criteria, which are already represented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb 'Filter' with the resource 'post feed' and enumerates three specific filter dimensions (folder, following status, unread status). This clearly states the tool's function, though it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools like search_posts or get_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 the tool should be used when filtering the feed by folder, following, or unread status, but it offers no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives are mentioned, leaving the choice between this and get_feed/search_posts to inference.

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