Get a social post

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and open-world, and the description adds useful operational context: per-platform unit costs and the fact that failed calls are not billed. It does not cover authentication or rate-limit behavior, but that is a smaller gap given the annotations.

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?

It is front-loaded with the core outcome, then uses compact platform bullets for the variable parameter surface, followed by a brief cost note. The structure is efficient and every section serves a clear 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?

For a read-only single-post lookup with no output schema, the description provides enough about return fields, platform parameters, and cost. It could be strengthened by explicitly distinguishing itself from the social-profile, comments, and list tools.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful platform-specific detail by listing the accepted parameter names for each platform and clarifying that id may be supplied at the top level.

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 opening phrase 'One post: text, author, media, counts, time' establishes that this retrieves a single social post and previews its contents. It is clearly narrower than sibling list_social_posts, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 platform bullets make clear that an id and platform determine usage, and the cost note helps decide whether to call it. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance versus get_social_profile, list_social_posts, or get_social_comments.

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