enrich_businesses_linkedin_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It lists return values but fails to mention any limitations, rate limits, data recency, or authentication requirements. For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 efficient with a clear opening sentence followed by a bullet list of return items. Each bullet adds value, though the list could be slightly more concise. Overall, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the primary purpose and return types. However, it lacks details on pagination, result limits, or data freshness, which would help the AI use it correctly. It is minimally complete.

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?

The only parameter, business_ids, is well-documented in the input schema with a clear description. The tool description adds no further meaning beyond what the schema provides. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get LinkedIn posts for public companies', specifying the verb, resource, and target. It distinguishes from sibling tools like enrich_prospects_linkedin_posts by focusing on businesses. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other enrich_businesses_* tools, so a slight deduction.

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 LinkedIn posts for public companies are needed. No explicit when-not or alternatives are provided. Sibling tools like enrich_businesses_firmographics or enrich_prospects_linkedin_posts exist but are not mentioned, leaving the AI to infer context.

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