Blog Posts List

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds the required OAuth scope ('read_content'), the pinned API version (2025-03), and the full response envelope {count, page, per_page, total?, has_more, next_page?, items[]}, which matters since there is no output schema.

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?

Five short lines, front-loaded with the verb and resource, followed by endpoint, scope, version and return shape. No filler or repetition of the title.

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 tool with 100% schema coverage and full annotations, the description supplies the missing pieces: auth scope, API version, and return envelope in the absence of an output schema. Only pagination-walking guidance is absent.

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% and every parameter (page, per_page, fields, response_format, blog_id) is documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no extra semantics about parameter interaction, such as the page*per_page cap, which the schema already carries.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List posts of a blog') plus the exact HTTP route, so an agent can tell it apart from tiendanube_blogs_list and tiendanube_pages_list by resource alone. It does not explicitly call out the sibling boundary, which keeps it just below a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied: the required scope 'read_content' and the mandatory blog_id signal a read operation on an existing blog, but there is no guidance on when to prefer this over tiendanube_blogs_list or how to paginate across large result sets. Adequate but leaves the routing decision to inference.

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