get_post_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It communicates a read-only fetch operation, explains the full response structure (post plus three related groups), and clarifies that the 'full' parameter controls the detail level of similarPosts. It does not discuss auth, rate limits, or error behavior, but it is reasonably transparent for a read 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 compact: two sentences front-loaded with the action, then the essential API context and parameter notes. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or repetition of the schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description helpfully enumerates the return groups, which is essential for an agent to use the result. It also provides the important API context that this is the canonical fetch-by-id replacement. It could be more complete about related-tool routing or pagination details, but it is sufficient for a 2-parameter read tool.

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, and it does. It clearly identifies post_id as required and explains the meaning of 'full' as controlling the similarPosts response size. The schema already supplies the types, so the description adds the behavioral meaning needed for correct invocation.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch a post + 3 related groups,' and it enumerates the exact related-group categories. It also distinguishes itself as 'the canonical fetch by id' and explicitly notes there is no direct getById operation, which separates it from search and other sibling tools.

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 usage context by framing this as the canonical fetch-by-id tool and noting the absence of a direct getById in the GraphQL API. It states the required input, post_id, but does not explicitly name sibling tools that should be used for alternate purposes such as search or comments.

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