get_post_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that the tool returns post, thread, author profile, and engagement metrics, indicating a read-only nature. However, it does not detail what 'engagement metrics' entails or mention any rate limits or data limits, which would enhance transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loading the key purpose and following with a usage note. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 no output schema and a moderate number of parameters (4), the description covers the main return components (post, thread, author, engagement) and usage context (authentication). It lacks explicit details on return format or error handling, but for a read tool with clear parameter names, it is sufficiently complete.

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 should compensate. The description mentions 'post', 'thread context', 'author profile', and 'engagement metrics', which map to the boolean parameters (includeThread, includeAuthorProfile, includeEngagement) and the required uri. This provides partial meaning, but the description does not explicitly explain each parameter's effect or format.

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 clearly that the tool gets comprehensive post information in a single call, including post, thread context, author profile, and engagement metrics. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_thread (only thread) and get_user_profile (only user), making the purpose specific and clear.

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 guidance on when to use the tool (single call for comprehensive info) and notes authentication impact ('Works without authentication but provides more data when authenticated'). This gives context on usage but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives.

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