get_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the return shape (title, content snippet, tags, author) and implies a non-destructive read, but says nothing about behavior when the id/slug is invalid or mismatched, or whether content is truncated.

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?

A single tight sentence with zero filler, front-loading the action and following immediately with the concrete return fields.

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 usefully enumerates the returned fields, which is the key missing structured information for a read tool. It stops short of covering error behavior or the id/slug relationship, but is otherwise sufficient for a simple two-param fetch.

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 both parameters are already documented as 'Post ID (numeric)' and 'Post URL slug', establishing the baseline of 3. The description adds no extra meaning, such as whether id and slug must refer to the same post or how slug is derived.

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 (Read) and resource (a post from CoderLegion) and enumerates the returned fields, which clearly distinguishes it from list_posts, search_posts, and browse_tag. It does not name those siblings explicitly, but the single-post read intent is unambiguous.

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 agent can infer this fetches one post by id/slug, but there is no statement of when to prefer it over search_posts or list_posts, and no mention of prerequisites or failure conditions.

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