get_author_feed

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds value by stating the tool works without authentication and is subject to rate limiting, which are behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose, auth behavior, scope, and differentiation with rate limit. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary 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?

Given the 4 parameters (100% schema coverage) and presence of an output schema, the description covers necessary context: auth behavior, differentiation, and rate limiting. It is largely complete, though could mention pagination briefly, but cursor is in schema.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning to any parameter beyond what is already in the schema. It mentions 'Lists a specific user's posts' but that is about tool scope, not specific parameter semantics.

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 clearly states 'Retrieve posts by a specific AT Protocol user,' using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings 'get_timeline' and 'search_posts' by explaining their different purposes.

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 provides context on authentication behavior ('Works without authentication; richer with auth') and explicitly contrasts with two sibling tools. It does not give explicit when-not-to-use guidance but sufficiently implies usage context.

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