List blog posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds behavioral value by disclosing paging support (page/limit), which is not present in annotations. It does not mention sorting or ordering, but that is a minor gap for a simple list 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?

Two sentences with zero filler: the first states the resource and return fields, the second covers paging. Key information is front-loaded, and every clause 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 read-only list operation with three well-documented parameters, output schema present, and readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description is complete. It conveys the core purpose and paging behavior; remaining details like defaults and response formats live in the schema/output schema, so nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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%: page, limit, and response_format are all described in the schema. The description mentions paging but adds no nuance beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Description begins with the specific verb 'List' and names the exact resource 'Repovive blog posts', then enumerates the returned fields (title, slug, author, publication date, read time, likes/views, tags). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools like repovive_list_contests or repovive_list_courses, and there is no competing 'list_posts' sibling.

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 context is clear: use this tool when a listing of blog posts is needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource 'blog posts' implicitly separates it from other list_* siblings. The paging note gives a hint about how to use it at scale.

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