list_published_posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description consistently aligns by listing published posts (a read operation). The description's main added value is the return field disclosure. It doesn't contradict annotations. Some behavioral detail (pagination clamping, rate limits) is in the schema rather than description, which is acceptable.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action, zero filler. Every word earns its place.

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 simple paginated list tool with readOnlyHint annotation, 100% schema coverage on both params, and no output schema, the description is adequate. It declares the return fields which compensates for the missing output schema. Could mention pagination behavior or total counts, but not critical for correct usage.

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%, with both limit and offset documented including the Substack clamping behavior. The description itself adds minimal parameter meaning, but the schema does the heavy lifting, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb+resource ('List published posts') and specifies the return payload shape (title, date, slug, URL). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like list_drafts and list_scheduled_posts by scoping to published 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 implies this is for browsing published posts, and the sibling list distinguishes it from drafts/scheduled posts. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternative naming, though the tool name itself is reasonably unambiguous.

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