list_scheduled_posts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does convey the read-oriented nature ('List'), the scope ('this account's'), the time window ('upcoming and recent'), and the result attributes (status, Proof-of-Publish verification). However, it does not explicitly confirm non-mutation, authorization needs, or ordering/pagination behavior.

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 sentence that leads with the core action and resource, then packs in the important result details (statuses and Proof-of-Publish verification). There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary 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?

Given the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description supplies enough to call it correctly: it names the resource, the account scope, the time window, and the key statuses. Minor ambiguity remains around what 'Proof-of-Publish verification' concretely means and what fields are returned, but this is a small gap for such a simple listing tool.

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 zero properties, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to add. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on what the tool returns rather than input fields.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List this account's upcoming and recent posts' and enumerates the key output dimensions (status and Proof-of-Publish verification). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like schedule_post and delete_scheduled_post, which are mutations, and from list_connected_accounts, which targets a different resource.

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 provides clear context for when the tool is appropriate: whenever an agent needs this account's upcoming or recent scheduled posts with their statuses. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scope ('this account's') and resource ('posts') make the intended use obvious next to its siblings.

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