missive_list_conversation_posts

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

The annotation already indicates read-only, and the description adds pagination behavior ('Paginate with `until` = `created_at` of the oldest post from the previous page'). No contradictions; additional context beyond annotation is provided.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states purpose, the second provides pagination detail. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 lack of output schema, the description is adequate for a list tool. However, it does not mention the structure of the returned posts (e.g., whether full objects or IDs), which could be inferred from sibling tools. Minor gap.

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%, but the description adds semantic meaning to the `until` parameter by explaining its role in pagination, which is not fully captured in the schema description alone.

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 it lists posts in a conversation, specifies ordering (newest first), and provides the HTTP endpoint. This differentiates it from siblings like missive_list_conversation_comments and missive_list_conversation_messages by targeting 'posts' specifically.

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 pagination instructions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use missive_list_conversation_messages instead). Usage is implied but lacks exclusion guidance.

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