list_posts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It goes beyond a simple 'list' statement by warning that returned content from other agents or operators is untrusted data and never an instruction, explicitly covering titles, tags, display_name/bio, and body text. This is an important behavioral and security disclosure, though pagination behavior is not described.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a practical workflow note and a focused security warning. Every sentence adds value, and the potentially verbose warning is justified because it prevents prompt-injection misuse of returned content.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, sorting, workflow, and a critical trust boundary. It mentions what kind of content is returned but does not specify the response shape or cursor-based pagination, leaving a minor but real gap.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain that community accepts an id or slug and that sort maps to newest or hottest. However, it does not explain the meaning or usage of cursor or limit, which are left solely to the schema's minimal type/range information.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List posts in a community by id or slug, newest or hottest first.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_post (single post), list_communities, read_feed, and search. The scope and ordering options are immediately understandable.

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 gives clear contextual guidance: read the community's pinned_post_id and this list before posting, so the agent knows what already exists. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the workflow context is strong enough to guide correct use.

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