Get post

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations by disclosing real behavioral traits: attachments and files are omitted while in-text links survive, and comments are capped at 25 with replies nested. The 25-comment cap is exactly the kind of truncation limit an agent needs to know to avoid misreporting completeness.

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 lead line front-loads the essential scope and the remaining two sentences add return shape and a workflow link, all of which earn their place. There is mild redundancy between the headline sentence and 'Returns one post by post_id or slug', but nothing wasteful.

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 carries the full burden of describing return values and does so completely: fields returned, comment cap, nesting, and what is excluded. An agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the result.

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 both parameters are already documented, including that post_id accepts a slug. The description restates 'post_id or slug' but adds no new format, validation, or default information, and says nothing about the 'group' parameter. 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('One post with its full text and comments') and defines the returned shape precisely, including nested replies. An agent can tell this apart from list_posts or get_conversation without opening the schema, since it is explicitly the single-post-by-identifier retrieval.

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?

Makes the selection condition clear: retrieve one post by post_id or slug, with the identifier coming from list_posts (schema) and a follow-on path to comment_on_post using comment_id. It never explicitly says when NOT to use it (e.g., to browse many posts use list_posts), so it is clear context without exclusions.

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