Get Company Posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, establishing the tool's safe, read-only nature. The description adds the 'recent posts' scope but does not disclose behavioral details like result limits, ordering, pagination, or authentication needs. It aligns with annotations without contradiction.

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 sentence of 10 words, front-loading the core action. It wastes no words and is highly scannable.

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 tool is simple (one parameter, read-only, output schema present), and the description covers the essential 'what'. The 'recent posts' wording is slightly vague about recency windows, but the output schema and annotations fill most gaps, making the description adequate for its complexity.

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%, with company_name fully described and provided with examples. The tool description adds no parameter details beyond the schema, so it does not compensate for any gaps. 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('recent posts from a company's LinkedIn feed'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_company_profile or get_company_employees. The scope is unambiguous.

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: when you want a company's recent posts. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites, leaving usage guidance implied rather than explicit.

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