List posts

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

The annotations already establish that the tool is read-only and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing pagination, the presence of platform statuses and metrics, and the precise sort order using publishedAt, scheduledAt, and createdAt.

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 compact and front-loaded, getting straight to the verb, resource, and filters in the first sentence. The second sentence adds ordering and usage guidance with no wasted words.

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 an 11-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers filtering, pagination, ordering, and result content. It omits a couple of filter dimensions like approvalStatus, but the schema covers those, so the description is sufficient for correct invocation.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description summarizes the filter categories and notes optionality, but it does not add meaning beyond what the input schema already documents for each parameter.

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 a specific verb and resource ('List posts'), enumerates the filter dimensions, and clearly explains the output includes paginated results, platform statuses, and metrics. It also distinguishes itself from the visual dashboard, helping the agent separate it from sibling view_posts.

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 states an explicit use case: 'when the user wants to browse, filter, or check the status of existing posts as raw data'. It also adds an exclusion, 'not the visual dashboard', which implies a dashboard-oriented sibling tool without naming one explicitly.

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