linkfetch_get_post

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the return payload (text, author, counts) but says nothing about read-only status, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error behavior for a read operation.

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?

One sentence that front-loads the resource and payload before giving the identifier's format and source. No filler or repetition.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the resource, the return fields, and the id's origin. It omits authentication and usage routing, but those are not critical for an agent to call this GET correctly.

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% and the single parameter is documented as 'Numeric activity id.' The description goes beyond the schema by explaining where the id comes from (the number in the LinkedIn activity URL), adding useful lookup context.

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 identifies the specific resource (a single LinkedIn post) and its key (activity id), and lists the payload (text, author, counts). It does not name a sibling tool to contrast against, but the singular 'a single post' distinguishes it from list/search siblings like search_posts or get_profile_posts.

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?

No explicit when-to-use statement, no when-not, and no alternative tools are named. The only guidance is implicit in the identifier format, which tells the agent what input is needed but not when to choose this tool over search_posts or get_post_reactions.

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