search_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Search posts in team' without explaining return format, result limits, ordering, or what 'team' scope means. It does imply a read-only operation but lacks detail.

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 extremely brief, consisting of a four-word phrase. While concise, it is under-specified and fails to convey essential context, making it more of a placeholder than a helpful description.

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 search tool with no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not mention what posts are searched (all posts vs. specific channels), how results are returned, or any limitations. The sibling tools provide context, but the description does not reference them.

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 basic descriptions for both query and team_id. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies. It does not clarify query semantics or how team_id filters results.

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 'Search posts in team' uses a specific verb 'Search' and resource 'posts', making its purpose clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_post and get_channel_posts, which retrieve specific posts or channel posts, though the scope 'in team' is somewhat unclear.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_channel_posts or get_post. There is no mention of alternative tools or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer use cases from the tool name and schema.

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