search-posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the purpose, omitting details about result format, pagination, sorting behavior, or side effects. While 'search' implies a read-only operation, this is not explicitly disclosed, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 concise sentence ('Search for posts on Bluesky') that is front-loaded and free of fluff. Every word contributes meaning with no unnecessary additions.

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?

With no output schema, the description should at least indicate the return value (e.g., a list of posts). It does not, and also omits mention of authentication, rate limits, or result fields. The tool is simple, but this minimal description leaves important contextual gaps for an agent deciding to invoke it.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, with each parameter (query, sort, limit) having a clear description and the sort parameter documented with an enum. The description adds no extra parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the schema already carries the semantic weight.

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 the tool 'Search for posts on Bluesky' with a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('posts on Bluesky'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'search-people' and 'search-feeds' by the target content type.

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 purpose implies when to use it (when searching posts) but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like search-people or search-feeds. There are no exclusions or alternative names referenced, so it meets the baseline but lacks explicit differentiation.

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