Search Posts

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

The description goes beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations by explaining that content search is an infinite scroll and that max_pages caps the scroll depth rather than fetching discrete pages. This is critical operational behavior that the annotations alone would not convey.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first line, then expands with usage context and differentiations. Every sentence adds value—the hiring-use case example, the global vs. feed distinction, and the infinite-scroll caveat all earn their place.

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 an output schema, the description need not explain return values. The combination of description, annotations (read-only, open-world), and thorough schema (all parameters documented with defaults and constraints) covers everything an agent needs to decide when and how to use this tool correctly. Actual use-case guidance and behavioral details complete the picture.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value for keywords by providing example patterns ('Buscamos Unity', 'AI automation hiring') and clarifies the infinite-scroll semantics of max_pages. The date_posted parameter is fully documented in the schema with accepted spellings.

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 tool searches LinkedIn posts/content globally by keyword, specifically the 'Posts' tab. It distinctly differentiates from siblings like get_feed (own home feed) and get_company_posts (one company's page), making it unambiguous what this tool does.

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 explicitly explains when to use this tool: to catch informal hiring posts that often precede formal job listings. It also provides clear exclusions by naming alternative tools (get_feed and get_company_posts) for different use cases, giving agents direct decision criteria.

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