Delimit Social History

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond annotations by revealing the underlying call (ai.social.get_post_history), explicitly stating 'Side effects: read-only,' and noting that Reddit entries include thread context. This is useful behavioral context, though it could go further with pagination or filtering details.

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 well-structured with short labeled sections (When to use, When NOT to use, Sibling contrast, Side effects) that make scanning easy. Every sentence carries functional information, with no filler or redundant restatements of the title. It is dense but appropriately sized for the amount of guidance it provides.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage conditions, exclusions, sibling relationships, and side effects. With a 100% documented schema and an output schema present, nothing essential for correct invocation is missing. The note about thread context also prepares the agent for the shape of returned Reddit entries. The tool is fully contextualized.

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%, and all four parameters have clear descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies. No parameter explanation is missing, but the description contributes no extra semantic enrichment.

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: 'View recent social media post history.' It also explicitly differentiates from siblings by stating 'this reads what was already posted,' making it unmistakably distinct from delimit_social_generate and delimit_social_post. The purpose is fully 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 an explicit 'When to use' section with concrete use cases (recalling prior posts/comments for follow-ups and DM replies) and an explicit 'When NOT to use' section naming delimit_social_generate and delimit_social_target. The sibling contrast further clarifies role boundaries, leaving no ambiguity about when to select this tool.

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