get_company_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully explain behavior. It mentions returning post text and a meta line, but does not disclose error handling (e.g., what if the company slug is invalid), data ordering (chronological vs. algorithmic), rate limits, or that it is a read-only operation. This is insufficient for a data-retrieval tool.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the main purpose. There is no wasted text; every word adds value. It is concise and well-structured.

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 few parameters, the description covers the basics (input, output). However, it lacks details on ordering, pagination, error cases, and the scope of 'recent'. While adequate for a simple tool, it leaves some important context undefined.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it gives an example URL slug and states the default count. It does not clarify the meaning of 'recent' or any other nuance. Thus, it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 the tool's purpose: getting a company's recent posts by LinkedIn URL slug. It provides an example ('google') and specifies the return content ('post text + a short meta line'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_company (company info) and get_feed (personal feed).

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 usage by giving the input format (URL slug), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide prerequisites. There is no guidance on when not to use it or known limitations, leaving the agent to infer context.

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