get_post_likes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly states the read operation but does not disclose details such as authentication requirements, response format, or pagination behavior. It is not misleading, but it adds no behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

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, concise sentence: "Get list of users who liked a post." It contains no filler words and effectively communicates the tool's purpose.

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?

The tool is a simple retrieval operation with a low complexity. The description adequately explains the purpose, and the schema documents both parameters. The absence of an output schema is compensated by the straightforward nature of the task, making the description sufficiently complete.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions: post_id as 'ID of the post to get likes for' and limit as 'Number of likes to retrieve'. The tool description adds no extra parameter information, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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 "Get list of users who liked a post" uses a specific verb and resource, making it clear what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like like_post, unlike_post, and get_user_followers by uniquely focusing on retrieving the list of users who liked a specific 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?

The description provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. The use case is implied by the tool's unique purpose among siblings, but there is no mention of when to prefer this over other tools or any prerequisites.

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