phabricator_blog_post_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, consistent with "Search", so there is no contradiction. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations: no pagination behavior, visibility handling, attachment behavior, or result semantics.

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 front-loaded phrase with zero waste, so it is concise and easy to scan. Its terseness is efficient, though it leaves little structure for usage or behavioral context.

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?

The schema is fully described and covers the seven parameters including nested objects, so the description need not repeat parameter details. Still, for a search tool with no output schema, the description does not explain result format, pagination expectations, or when to prefer this over sibling search tools, leaving it only 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all seven parameters and nested constraint/attachment fields are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond naming blog posts as the resource, which is the baseline expectation when schema coverage is high.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Search Phame blog posts". It distinguishes posts from sibling tools like phabricator_blog_search and phabricator_blog_post_create, but it does not explicitly differentiate against other search tools or explain scope.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives. It only implies usage through the word "Search" and leaves routing among the many sibling search tools to the agent.

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