blog_billets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds two real behavioral facts beyond the annotations: results are ordered newest-first and include post content, which helps the agent anticipate the payload. It does not describe pagination behavior or result limits.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; sorting and payload hints are packed in efficiently. It is arguably too terse given the undocumented parameters, but as pure conciseness it is strong.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned (posts with content) but omits pagination semantics and the required blog_id's role. Annotations cover the safety profile, so the gap is moderate rather than severe.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about either parameter. The meaning of blog_id (format/source) and the paging semantics of page (with its default of 0 and apparent lack of a page-size parameter) are left entirely undocumented.

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 names a specific resource (published posts of a blog) and adds scope detail (newest-to-oldest order, content included), which distinguishes it from sibling blog_commentaires (comments) and blog_lister (blog list). However, it never states an explicit retrieval verb, so it reads as a description of data rather than an action.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite (e.g. needing a blog_id), and no mention of any alternative tool such as blog_commentaires for the comments attached to these posts. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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